Skip to content
Menu

Case studies

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

Showing 25-36 of 58 results with 2 filters

Choose a sort order
  • Managing hazardous manual tasks using the PErforM program

    Halliburton shared their experiences of their risk management program evolution at the PErforM network meeting on 8 May 2014.

  • Holy Cross Laundry

    Holy Cross Laundry has improved their stay at work and their claim durations have decreased following their participation in the IPaM program.

  • Russell Transport: Fighting the flu

    Drivers at Russell Transport often work independently, constantly moving in and out of offices and interacting with people from all walks of life at multiple workplaces and delivery destinations.

  • Mandatory participation results in damages paid

    Bagiante v Bunnings Group Limited. [2012] QSC, 31 May 2012. Employers should take care when arranging team events and participation in these activities should be on a voluntary basis.

  • Initial reporting of injury of vital importance

    Apolloni v Traffic Technologies Management Division Pty Ltd, 20 March 2012. This case clearly demonstrates the value of contemporaneous recording of injury details in diary notes, incident reports and applications for compensation. In this case the importance of the recording was as to the time of the injury but this could equally apply to the description of the cause of the injury.

  • Industry standard equipment not enough to satisfy duty of care

    Thompson v Cranetrans Pty Ltd [2013] QSC 250 23 September 2013. Where equipment is provided which accords with industry standard, that does not necessarily mean that the employer’s conduct has met a standard of reasonable care.

  • Accident not caused by failures

    Wolters v The University of the Sunshine Coast [2012] QSC 298, 5 October 2012. This is another case where the legal term of causation has been examined. The court found the employer breached its duty at common law and in contract by failing to adequately manage the behaviour of the supervisor following the event with the previous worker. However, the court held that the breach did not cause the claimant's loss, as it could not find that any action by the employer would have prevented the supervisor's actions on the day.

  • 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.

  • Transit Australia Group

    Through the IPaM program, Transit Australia Group identified strategies to improve safety and reduce associated costs and impacts on the business.

  • Back on the road

    With the support of his employer and by having the right attitude, Len Parsons successfully got back on the road as a truck driver and returned to the job he loves.

  • No reason to anticipate misconduct might be dangerous

    Pols v AME Products [2013] QDC 190 19 August 2013. There was no reason to anticipate misconduct might be dangerous to other employees.There was no reason to anticipate misconduct might be dangerous to other employees.

  • Not foreseeable for racial joking to cause psychiatric condition

    Guorgi v Pipemakers Australia [2013] QSC 198 9 August 2013. It wasn’t reasonably foreseeable that the worker would suffer a psychiatric condition as a result of racial jokes.