Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Court of Papua New Guinea

Wemin v The State [1989] PGNC 23; N781 (30 October 1989)

Unreported National Court Decisions

N781

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

W.S. 6 OF 1989
KUMINE WEMIN
V
THE STATE

Mount Hagen

Woods J
21 September 1989
30 October 1989

NEGLIGENCE - Death - Claim by widow and children - Quantum of Damages - Villager.

Counsel:

Mr O’Connor, for the Plaintiff.

Mr Ninai, for the Defendant.

30 October 1989

WOODS J: This isaim by the widow ofow of one Kumo Wemin who was killed on 4th February 1987 when he was struck by a motor vehicle owned by the State.

The action is brought for and on behalf of the dece#8217;s widow and three chie children aged 15 years, 10 years and 7 years at his death.

Liability has been admitted on the part of the defendant and this has come before me on the quantum of damages.

The deceased was aged about 40 years at the time of his death and prior to his death he was in good health. He was a village man cultivating traditional crops and some coffee and was the sole support of his wife and children. The cash income received from the garden and coffee has been estimated by the plaintiff at K450 a year from the sale of coffee cherries and K50 from the sale of vegetables. Whilst it may be argued that the plaintiff herself assisted with some of the cash producing work one should not disregard the other work which the deceased would have done for the benefit of the family, which work cannot be given a cash figure. This other work would include the construction of gardens, fences and the construction and maintenance of their home.

When comparing the figures applicable to a person in a modern style of employment with the figures estimated for a subsistence village person I find that figures of K5.50 each for loss of dependence for the plaintiff and the infants to be a quite reasonable figure especially when the cost of education may have to be met for the children.

With respect to the period for dependence I agree it is reasonable to allow for loss of dependence for the wife until she attains the age of 60 years and of course the children should be allowed till they each attain the age of 16 years. With respect to the plaintiff widow I would allow a deduction for contingencies of 5%.

I will not add an amount for the loss of expectation of life as that would have been covered by the Basic Protection Payment.

I therefore assess the claim as follows:

1) ټ&##160; F60; For ther the widow - dependency for 20 years at K5.50 per week capitalised at 787.894 comes to K4,333.00 less 5% for contingencies being K216.00 to a total of K4,117.00.