Skip to content

Case studies

Filter by Industry
Filter by Audience
Filter by Author
Filter by Hazard type
Hazard type
Filter by Topic
Selected filters

Showing 85-96 of 132 results with 1 filter

Choose a sort order
  • Relationship between two separate injuries

    Hartin v Rigel Constructions Pty Ltd [2013] QSC 320 21 November 2013. The case turned upon the extent to which the first incident caused the derangement of the vertebral disc, and the relationship between the injury sustained in the first and second incident, and the loss and damage caused by the first incident.

  • Employers must provide safe work system

    Caird v State of Queensland, 30 July 2004. Negligence in enforcing a safe system of work can result in substantial compensation, regardless of the significant long term effects. An abattoir case study.

  • Employer not negligent in worker injury

    Campbell v Galaxy Plumbing [2013] QSC 315 18 November 2013. There was no evidence that the task was so physically demanding that it could not be performed by one man who was also carrying out a variety of other jobs. The employer’s failure to provide more labourers was not negligent.

  • Causation is key

    Cahill v Bowden 3 February 2015. This case is a reminder of the importance of proving the causal link between the damage suffered and the alleged negligence of the defendant. It is not enough to show there was an act or omission by an employer and that there was injury. The act or omission must have caused or materially contributed to the injury.

  • Employer found not negligent in security

    Karanfilov v MSS Security & Ors [2013] QSC 304. Injured worker suffered post-traumatic stress disorder when he was working as a security guard.

  • Injury due to an unsafe system of work

    Constance v Bush Services Pty Ltd [2013] 24 June 2013. The Court expects employers to take all reasonable precautions to implement and maintain a safe system of work to ensure that workers are not injured while at work.

  • Damages awarded for physical and psychological injury

    Harris v State of Queensland [2014] QDC 35 28 February 2014. Liability was admitted by the employer, but a psychiatric injury, which arose after the physical workplace injury, led to the trial to judge the amount of damages.

  • Liability admitted but future economic loss disputed

    Haden v Smith's Snackfood Company Ltd [2013] QMC 1 11 February 2013. The plaintiff won in the Magistrates Court, but the decision was successfully appealed due to an incorrect calculation of damages.

  • Damages awarded despite lie about pre-existing symptoms

    Luck v Civil Mining and Construction Pty Ltd, 16 December 2009. This case study discusses how a Court may find that a worker who has lied about their pre-existing symptoms, sustained serious injuries from previous non-work related events, or has credit issues, can still award damages.

  • The Reasonable Foreseeability Threshold - unfortunate accidents can happen

    Micallef v Endeavour Foundation [2013] QDC 142, 28 June 2013. WorkCover Queensland was recently successful in defending a matter for Endeavour Foundation in the District Court Decision of Micallef v Endeavour Foundation [2013] QDC 142.

  • Was a breach in duty of care the cause of harm?

    Carswell v Corporation of the Trustees of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane [2012] QSC, 7 September 2012. This case highlights that even though an employer may have breached their duty of care, the onus is on the worker to prove that the breach was a material cause of the harm suffered by the worker.

  • Onus of proof

    Marshall v Queensland Rehabilitation Services Pty Ltd, 19 June 2012. Claimants will find it difficult to prove negligence against Employers who clearly document staff training, daily interactions and enforce safe systems of work.