Kanakis –v– Beamish Magistrates Court WA. Coram Magistrate Cockram
The claimant had a 2006 Porsche Boxter. He hired a 2014 Porsche Boxter as a replacement. The court allowed the hire costs of $16,813.03 in full.
There were two main issues: need and rate.
The defendant wanted the claimant to be satisfied with a Nissan Pulsar. The court rejected the application of Droga –v– Cannon and Wong –v– Maroubra Automotive. The decisions in these cases are “inconsistent with the objective of damages to put the party in the position as if he had not sustained the wrong.” And further “it is not the need for a replacement that is being compensated rather it is the interference with the plaintiff’s right to use a particular property that is being compensated”, applying the Earl of Halsbury’s LC judgement in ‘The Medina’.
The idea that it is for the plaintiff to establish “the need for a replacement car of similar quality to that which was damaged” was firmly rejected.
The Defendant mounted an age/value argument. It was rejected. the value of Mr Kanakis’ 2006 Boxter in 2014 is not a useful or appropriate way to decide what vehicle he was entitled to in 2014. Previous decisions allowing such arguments were expressly not followed including Ullah –v– Markobrad.
It is for the defendant to prove the rate of hire includes such benefits. The fact that the rate was within market rate and Compass gave evidence that there was no charge made for any additional services was sufficient to dispose of this point.