Clement Skinner J:

This is the hearing of an appeal and a cross-appeal against the decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge, Kuching given on 21 April 2003 after a full trial. The action in the court below was brought by the 1st and 2nd plaintiff to recover loss and damages for personal injuries suffered by them as a result of an accident which occurred on 10 July, 2000 at Mile 6 1/2 Jalan Kuching-Serian, when a motorcycle driven by the 1st plaintiff with the 2nd plaintiff riding as pillion, collided into the back of a bus driven by the 1st defendant and owned by the 2nd defendant.

The learned Sessions Court Judge found that the 1st defendant was primarily responsible for the accident, but that the 1st plaintiff had contributed towards it. Accordingly the learned Sessions Court Judge apportioned liability as follows: 1st defendant 60% to blame and the 1st plaintiff 40% to blame.

With regard to the injuries suffered by the 1st and 2nd plaintiff as a result of the accident, it will be sufficient to repeat here what the learned Sessions Court Judge said about the matter in her judgment (at p. 95 Record of Appeal):

Arising out of the said collision, the plaintiffs were thrown from the motorcycle with the 1st plaintiff suffering the more serious injuries ie, severe brain damage described in Dr. Lim Ming Ann's (PW1) report (exh. P1) as acute subdural haemorrhage on the left side of the brain with midline shift of 1.5 cm and punctuate haemorrhages around the brain stem. The said injuries were of such severity that the aftermath of the collision caused the 1st plaintiff to be in a vegetative state. In addition to the injuries to his brain the 1st plaintiff also suffered a 3 cm laceration wound over the right brow, a 2 cm laceration wound over his scrotum and a distal radius bone fracture. The 2nd plaintiff was luckier. He escaped with only a closed fracture of his left patella bone which was treated, according to Dr. Rajesh Asnani (PW4) in his report (exh. P9) with a cast of plaster of paris.

For the injuries just described by her and their consequences, the learned Sessions Court Judge assessed and awarded the 1st and 2nd plaintiff the following amounts under various heads of damage:

1. Special Damages

1st plaintiff

(a) Agreed special damages ... ... RM 1,328

(b) For various receipted items ... ... RM 1,016

(c) Pre-trial loss of income ... ... RM 48,000

2nd plaintiff

(a) SGH receipts ... ... RM 60

(b) Pre-trial loss of income ... ... RM 2,760

2. General Damages

1st plaintiff

(a) Loss of amenities, pain and suffering ... RM200,000

(b) Future loss of income ... ... RM240,000

(c) Pre-trial nursing care ... ... RM 26,000

(d) Future nursing care ... ... RM888,000

2nd plaintiff

(a) Loss of amenities, pain and suffering ... RM 8,000

The learned Sessions Court Judge also awarded interest on the special damages at 6% from the date of accident until date of judgment and thereafter at 8% per annum until full payment. For the general damages, she awarded interest at 8% per annum from the date of filing of the action until full and final settlement.

The learned Sessions Court Judge awarded costs to the plaintiffs to be taxed if not agreed.

The 1st and 2nd defendants as well as the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs are dissatisfied with the learned Sessions Court Judge's finding of liability and her award of damages, hence this appeal and cross-appeal.

I will deal with the appeal and cross-appeal on liability first, but before doing so I should mention that for convenience I will continue to refer to the parties as they were in the court below.

Appeal On Liability

The learned Sessions Court Judge apportioned liability at 60% against the 1st defendant because she came to a finding that he was more to blame for the accident as he " had made a sudden, unscheduled stop at the road bay without giving ample notice to the plaintiffs who were riding behind him and was therefore largely to be blamed for the said collision".

And the learned Sessions Cou