CCH yesterday reported a recent decision of the Queensland Supreme Court: Case v Eaton  QSC 239.
The court was required determine whether the claimant, who was under 18 hence required investment of her damages until majority, should recover further damages for management fees in respect of the primary damages order.
At  it was noted that:
The question is whether (the claimant) is entitled in a claim of this kind to recover damages for the cost of managing the amount otherwise to be paid to her as damages. This question was resolved adversely to an applicant in a similar position in Maggs v RACQ Insurance Ltd (2016) QSC 41, a single Supreme Court Judge decision, relied upon by the second respondent. That decision, while not binding on me, would ordinarily be persuasive. However, the applicant here relies upon the application of apparently compelling reasoning in High Court authority, not referred to in the reasons in Maggs.
Here the court ruled at  that the need for management fees was as much a foreseeable outcome as the loss grounding the award to be managed. That was inescapable by reason of that need deriving from the legal disability inherent in the claimant’s age, a disability existing at the time of the loss and continuing to the present.
Accordingly management fees were recoverable.