I refer to my earlier posting and note the appeal in relation to future loss of income was dismissed:
 After noting the “strong evidence suggesting that… during 2010 the causal influence of [the appellant’s] injuries upon any incapacity to work had diminished significantly” and remarking on the appellant’s “over-presentation to examining experts in 2010 and the marked disproportion at that time between her injury” and her claimed symptoms, the primary judge reviewed the evidence of the accepted experts in relation to the appellant’s capacity to work. The primary judge implicitly contrasted the expert evidence with the appellant’s “bland assertions… in her quantum statement” which he found “unpersuasive”.
 Having regard to the expert evidence the primary judge found that the appellant would have been fit to return to work by 1 November 2010. He then allowed a further eight months for the appellant to obtain employment. This was in recognition of the appellant’s disadvantages arising from the time out of the work force and the need for her to be more discerning in her choice of employment as a result of her disabilities.
 These matters also support the rejection of the arguments advanced by the appellant in support of its future economic loss case.
Brisbane Barrister – David Cormack