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

All case studies

Choose a sort order
  • Injury attributable to pre-existing back disease

    Geary v REJV Services Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC. This case emphasises the importance of gathering past medical information to establish the extent of symptoms suffered due to pre-existing degeneration prior to the work event.

  • Industry solutions for managing the risks of workers being hit or crushed by heavy vehicles and trailers

    One Queensland business implemented an engineering solution to address the risks associated with working under heavy vehicles. The business purchased a heavy-duty four-post hydraulic truck lift.

  • Daryl Dickenson Transport - A load restraint safety case study

    It is not recommended to use fixed or pivoting lever binders because they can cause serious injury when applying or releasing lashings.

  • Assaults by third parties

    The Corporation of the Synod of the Diocese of Brisbane v Greenway [2017] QCA 103, 26 May 2017. Employer is found to breach its duty in failing to train staff and establish guidelines for properly responding to unsafe events.

  • Assessment of risk and training required for manual handling

    D’Arcy v Corporation of the Synod of the Diocese of Brisbane [2017] QSC 103, 31 May 2017. In this case the employer was found to be liable for a back injury sustained by the Plaintiff during the course of her employment.

  • Taking good care of safety at childcare centre

    Sesame Lane Childcare has shown some great strides in improving their health, safety and injury management programs after working with the Injury Prevention and Management program (IPaM).

  • Plaintiff’s failure to establish causation and onus of proof

    Claire Hammond v Cerebral Palsy of League Queensland M172/12 11 September 2013. 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.

  • 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.

  • The onerous obligation on an employer to instruct and warn

    Weaver v Endeavour Foundation [2013] QSC 93, 12 April 2013. This judgment effectively imposes a standard akin to perfection on an employer and goes to the scope of an employer’s duty of care generally. The employer was found liable for doing its very best to train staff to minimise foreseeable risks of injury in the workplace.

  • Credibility of the worker was important in determining the extent of the injury

    Richard Craig Adam v Skilled Group Limited and Anor [2013] QSC 7, 8 February 2013. While credibility issues on their own are not always compelling, the combination of them can cause considerable concern.

  • Judgement of breach of duty of care overturned on appeal

    Larkin v Suncorp Staff Pty Ltd [2013] QDC 028 Samios DCJ. A judgement ruling an employer breached its of duty of care was overturned on Appeal when it was noted that there was a low probability that an accident would occur and the resulting injuries would be minimal.

  • The bouncer and the wedding guest

    Baillie v Donald Wayne Jackson & Victoria Point Sharks Sporting Club Inc [2015] QDC 20 February 2015. This case highlights that it is not sufficient for a worker to show the employer has been negligent. It is necessary to show that the negligence caused the incident in which the worker was injured.