CASE STUDIES

For the Defendant

The Claimant, of independent means, held a highly paid, responsible post in a well known institution. She had been approached to head a start-up dot.com business, but unfortunately suffered back injuries in a RTA just before she was due to commence work.

The claim was substantial and the Claimant’s employment expert had built a plausible case for future career growth based on her history and experience at her previous employer, either with this or another dot.com firm. The argument was put forward that without the Claimant’s input (due to the accident) the dot.com firm had liquidated.

TGA established, through significant original research, that the infamous ‘dot.com bubble’ had burst two weeks after the Claimant’s intended start date and the company would have folded in any event. It follows, the Claimant would not have ‘easily’, as the other side’s expert put it, obtained an executive post in another dot.com company.