Greentree v Nominal Defendant
[2024] QDC 99 · Sheridan DCJ
Mr Greentree was driving on the Bruce Highway near Sippy Downs early one morning in April 2017 when his car veered off the road, hit a concrete culvert and rolled. He claimed an unidentified white car had overtaken him and suddenly braked, forcing him to swerve and lose control, and he sought damages from the Nominal Defendant (the insurer that covers accidents involving unidentified vehicles). He said he suffered soft tissue injuries to his neck, back, elbow and leg, plus post-traumatic stress and depression. The judge dismissed the claim. A key problem was the plaintiff's credibility: a chiropractic form he had filled in before the accident recorded back pain and aches for over 15 years, yet he told doctors and the court he had no prior problems. He also gave inconsistent evidence about his weight and his fear of driving, having actually driven his family on long trips after the accident, and produced no real evidence he worked as a concreter. The court could not be satisfied an unidentified vehicle existed or that the collision caused any significant injury, so the plaintiff recovered nothing.
Incident & injury
Single-vehicle collision with concrete culvert after veering off highway; plaintiff alleged an unidentified white car overtook and braked suddenly causing him to lose control. Court found the unidentified vehicle was not proven.
- Body regions
- Lumbar spine, Cervical spine, Left elbow, Left knee, Chest / thorax, Abdomen / pelvis, Psychiatric, Head
- Diagnoses
- musculoligamentous cervical spine injury, musculoligamentous lumbar spine injury, left elbow soft tissue injury with lateral epicondylitis, soft tissue injury and hematoma medial left knee and proximal tibia, abdominal and chest wall soft tissue injuries, cervicogenic headaches, post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive episode
- Incident date
- 3 April 2017
- Location
- Bruce Highway, Sippy Downs (near Frizzo Road on-ramp)
Quick facts
- Date of judgment
- 27 June 2024
- Claim type
- MAIA
- Proceeding
- Trial
- Plaintiff outcome
- Unsuccessful
- Plaintiff age at injury
- Occupation
- Self-employed concreter (claimed; not accepted by court) Technician / Trade Worker
- Liability
- Disputed
- ISV assessed
- 4 · Item 94 Schedule 4 Civil Liability Regulation 2014 (minor lumbar spine injury)
- Total damages
- $0
Outcome
The claim was dismissed. The court was unable to find on the balance of probabilities that an unidentified vehicle caused the collision, finding the plaintiff was not a witness of truth due to undisclosed long-standing pre-existing back, neck and pain complaints, false evidence about weight and inability to drive, and lack of any independent evidence of his claimed concreting income. The court also found it could not accept any significant physical or psychiatric condition was caused by the collision.
Defendant
1 The Nominal Defendant
CTP Insurer (statutory insurer of unidentified vehicle)
- Judgment against this defendant
- $0
Key issues
Greentree v Nominal Defendant [2024] QDC 99
When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.