UNIVERSITY / COURSE

Wrongs Act 1958

[Type the author name]
[Pick the date]




Wrongs Act 1958

1

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Assessment and Comparison ........................................................................................................................ 6
Personal Injury Damage Provisions .............................................................................................................. 7
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................... 9
References ................................................................................................................................................... 10


Wrongs Act 1958

2

Introduction
The Wrongs Act was introduced in the state of Victoria on 30th September 1958 and
was adopted and became operational on 1st April 1959. The purpose of the act was to handle
issues related to the damages which were not caused by transport injuries or during work
conditions. Various conditions of illegal activity and intoxication are considered in the act. The
court has to consider if the plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol or an intoxicant in case of
a negligence case. In case of breach of duty, the court should also consider the mentioned or if
the person was involved in an illegal activity or was under the influence of intoxicants.
The various heads which can be considered under wrongs act are criminal defamation
and if a case is already running in any court under Coroners Act 1985 or the Coroners Act 2008
for person publishing faithful information the case cannot be held under wrongs act (Luntz,
2002, pp. 21). Publisher of false defamatory information can be acted upon by the wrongs act.
The accused if found accountable could be imprisoned or fined. The illegal publication issues are
also taken into the act. The reference to occupiers liability is also considered. With respect to
negligence due to intoxication and illegal activities are also considered in the act. This section
considers negligence as a prime allegiance in the case. A section related to apology after the
proceedings is also incorporated in the act. If there is a case of death caused by neglect or by a
wrongful act the case can be tried under Wrongs Act. It reflects the legislative intervention in
case of torts or civil wrongs. Law of negligence is considered as an important tort. The various
events which are involved n negligence are breach of duty which might result to a loss or
damage to another person or events where negligence has resulted in personal injury or death in a
public utility, this excludes death caused in transportation. The harm can also be considered as a
medical case, the negligence is the prerogative of the court and the damages can be quiet evident
Wrongs Act 1958

3

and can be awarded for the sustained injuries. Section 22B has defined damages as any type of
monetary compensation whereas personal injuries are defined as damages that relate to the
death of or injury to a person caused by the fault of another person (McDonald, 2005, pp. 308).
The contribution definition considered in the act makes the accused compensate in terms
of the loss to the dependents financial and otherwise and directly takes into account the liability
involves as per the Transport Accident Act. The claim of personal injury and death of damages
for economic or non economic loss were governed by Wrongs law other than workspace injuries
and transport accidents. The workplace injuries are dealt by Accident Compensation Act and the
Transport Accident Act deals with transport accidents.
The main objective of the Transport Accident Act was to provide financial assistance in
case of an accident or an unfortunate eventuality. This led to the reduction in cost of
compensation for the Victorian community for motor transport related accidents. The aspect of
civil wrongdoings was also covered in the act. The act was to provide the most social and
economical compensation to the person involved in transport accidents, and adequate
compensation for the deceased too. The speed of execution of claims was also taken into
consideration by providing speedy and efficient trial. A suitable rehabilitation program for the
persons who were injured due to transport accidents is also included in the act. The act covers the
cases committed by negligence and which could be established in the court of law as civil
crimes. The legal injuries are not only limited to the physical ones but the others like emotional
and economic or privacy law infringement can also be accounted in the act. The act can resolve
the cases and can consider the charges as negligent and not criminal. The requirement of
evidence is considered low in such type of cases.
Wrongs Act 1958

4

The Transport Accident Commission was the statutory organization established to
execute the rules laid by the act and was responsible for efficient, economical and effective
execution of the Act. Initially the commission was incorporated as a corporate organization but
later on it was changed to more of a governing body. The administration and control of the act
provided rights to the commission to appoint advisory committees which can advice with respect
to the information or advice to the TAC.
The Transport Accident Fund manages the cash flow of the committee, the penal
charges; transport accident charges are deposited in this fund. The investment or a cash need
generated by the commission is also handled by the fund. The commission can also borrow
money from the fund. All other payments e.g. the state fund or to the treasury is also done by the
fund. The Borrowing and Investment Power Act can be considered for investments. As per the
act the commission can borrow as per borrow and investment power act. The budget for the
commission is presented to the minister before the fixed date for a given financial year. The
budget can be amended by the minister after deliberation with the treasurer. The commission
may pay dividends to the state on a yearly basis. The various points in this section are related to
the persons liability with respect to any damage suffered by another person may recover the
contribution from any other person liable in respect of the same damage. This contribution can
be extended to the dependents too (McDonald, 2005, pp 443).
The Wrongs Act 1958 was reformed in 2002 and 2003 under the tort law with a focus of
resolving the 2000 insurance issues. These insurance issues lead to ballooned expenditure front
he exchequer in the insurance premiums and the expenses were considered as a public liability.
The reforms were in acted for reducing the insurers liability and restricting the liability in
certain limits or in most of the cases to a minimum and hence reduce public damages by
Wrongs Act 1958

5

circumscribing them. There has been a conservative consideration against the reform as it is
quite possible that the legitimate claims are compromised because of the imposed conditions and
limitations. There are fairly good changes that till the time the tort reforms are well placed the
policy objectives of the reform, these anomalies , inequities , inconsistencies exist and are quite
evident since these reforms have been introduced. The main objective of the Transport Accident
Act was to provide financial assistance in case of an accident or an unfortunate eventuality. This
led to the reduction in cost of compensation for the Victorian community for motor transport
related accidents. The aspect of civil wrongdoings was also covered in the act. The act was to
provide the most social and economical compensation to the person involved in transport
accidents, and adequate compensation for the deceased too. The speed of execution of claims
was also taken into consideration by providing speedy and efficient trial. A suitable rehabilitation
program for the persons who were injured due to transport accidents is also included in the act.
The act covers the cases committed by negligence and which could be established in the court of
law as civil crimes. The legal injuries are not only limited to the physical ones but the others like
emotional and economic or privacy law infringement can also be accounted in the act. The act
can resolve the cases and can consider the charges as negligent and not criminal. The
requirement of evidence is considered low in such type of cases.
The various tort reforms led to a decline in the personal injury cases, there has been a
stable claim frequency, the claim size has been increased and mostly stable insurance premiums.


Wrongs Act 1958

6

Assessment and Comparison
The recommendation is based to provide an efficient and consistent option for the act.
The various considerations are made with respect to the adverse impact on the indemnity
insurance services. The high risk of claim borne by the defendants in an advent of a case is lost.
The impact such reform will make on the courts and medical panels have to be considered. The
reform must take care of the conflicts arising from other legislative laws such as Accidental
Compensation Act 1995, and Transport Accident Act 1986 (McDonald, 2005, pp. 487). And
other interstate laws, the various objectives to these instated laws should be dealt with as it will
lead to conflict of interest.
Hence to resolve these complex issues it is better to identify the extent and nature of the
problem. The various identified options which should include the view of various stakeholders
involved and other coherent laws of various states. Hence for dealing with the mentioned issues
at hand an impact on the funds for public liability and public indemnity insurance within the cost
and availability of insurance. The efficiency can also be monitored by taking into consideration
the incentives which make an impact to avoid injuries. Cost consideration for a failed litigation
and commercial impact on medical and courts. The equity can be established horizontally as
equal treatment should be given to equals. With respect to the various laws that exist for rewards
related to personal injury so that differences can be noted, for e.g. a claimant can receive
different award for the same injury for an injury happened at work or during a travel (IPP 2007,
pp 5). The Accident Compensation and Transport Accident Acts can be considered as a guideline
for the governing eligibility and the award for common law damages rather than those related
statutory provisions to no fault. If there is a need of vertical equity it should be deemed fair.
Like in the case of treatment of a high earner to a low earner based on economic cap and the
Wrongs Act 1958

7

charges of economic loss. A consistent approach should be maintained while operating the
provisions of the Wrongs Act and the underlying objectives of the tort reform.
Personal Injury Damage Provisions
Previously the court used the compensatory principle to award the damages for personal
injury. The method used was to give a sum of money to the appellant, so that they were able to
restore to their previous positions they would have been if there had been no false commitment.
It was observed that there was a lot of pressure on the financials related to these personal injury
damages for the government under the compensatory method and so the system became
unsustainable and un affordable. It was perceived that the liability of negligence was very easily
established to be accessible to high insurance premiums and due to this few insurers opted to go
out of the market and also led to a fewer type of insurances available for the public (Luntz, 2002,
pp. 18). The community resisted to pay huge levies which were insisted by the appropriate
compensation policy of the judiciary. The various principles which were proposed were mostly
related to the future sustainability of the people and were guided towards immediate resolution of
the disputes with a fair medical attention if required. These activities were a part of the social
security benefit being offered to all the citizens of the welfare state. In the system the total
number of minor claims was huge and was resolved by resolution at the hospital thus minimizing
the court visit and the system will be less burdened. Only the matters which relate to high
transaction cost are served by the judiciary (Negligence Review Panel, 2002, pp. 182). It is also
recommended to have threshold for economic and non economic loss, the monetary release of
funds for attendant care could be awarded by the court. These damages for high earners can be
compensated by providing an incentive. Hence a threshold is restricted to that total payable
amount in case of a death or an injury. The general damages can be taken care thresholds are
Wrongs Act 1958

8

decided depending on the type of claim. Sec 28LE describes the general damages and restricts it
to recoverable damages where the claimant has suffered a significant injury. The various
definitions of significant injury are. Where the impairment is more than 5%, in case of a
psychiatric issue, impairment can be considered more than 10%. Loss of fetus and loss of
children are also considered significant. For various other types of injuries a medical practitioner
can assess the degree and assessment can be taken for determination of impairment. In case there
is a need of an attendant for an injured person if there is a reasonable need. The services are
restricted to not less than six weeks and not less than six months. Previously the courts used to
award a lump sum expense to the claimant and hence the return value of this value should be
taken into consideration like future tax rate, expected rate of return of the investment and likely
real growth rate. A discount rate is set at 5% and is applied to all the courts. The rate is reflected
by the five year average return on the ten year commonwealth bonds (McDonald, 2005, pp. 456).
There are various issues in the operation of the act like there is a difference in the
limitation of recoverable amount in the Wrongs Law, The Accident Compensation and Transport
Accident Act. It is important to ensure that the Wrongs Act is properly functioning as per the
objectives defined in the tort law reform.
Various legislations have various compensation policies for personal injury. The wrongs
act says that the professional insurance firms are available for the goodwill of the community
and all the claims should be settled by these companies itself, while protecting the rights of the
people to access the court, who can ask the court to resolve the issue. The Accident
compensation act focuses in reducing the number of accidents and diseases provides just
compensation to injured workers, keep the cost of compensation in the threshold or to a
minimum, the safety of the persons at workplace has to be increased. The Transport Accident
Wrongs Act 1958

9

Act focuses on reduction of cost to the community for accident cases, to provide just
compensation in a socially economical manner and to provide a speed and efficient
compensation claims.
Conclusion
The 3 laws have different approaches, Wrongs act requires fault before damages are
awarded by the court, there is no significant threshold applied for injury, the accident and
transport act provide the statutory compensation without a fault basis. This approach has to be
changed to a more evaluative estimation method. These awards are called as benefits as it is a no
fault analysis. Apart from the previously mentioned details regarding awards, a worker has to
state a proof of permanent loss of 40% capacity or more. The act has a threshold which has to be
reached before an award can be contested. There are differences in the economic and non
economic losses, starting at $1.1 million to $500,000 respectively. Then there are discounted
rates which can be considered for compensation.


Wrongs Act 1958

10

References
1. McDonald, B. (2005). Legislative Intervention in the Law of Negligence: The Common
Law, Statutory Interpretation and Tort Reform in Australia. Sydney L. Rev., 27, 443.
2. Luntz, H. (2002). Reform of the Law of Negligence: Wrong Questions-Wrong
Answers. UNSWLJ, 25, 836.
3. Ipp, D. (2007). The Politics, Purpose and Reform of the Law of Negligence.Australian
Law Journal, 81(7), 456.
4. Australia. Treasury. Law of Negligence Review Panel, & Ipp, D. A. (2002).Review of the
law of negligence: final report. Commonwealth of Australia.