Baillie v Jackson

[2015] QDC 31

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Baillie v Jackson [2015] QDC 31

PARTIES:

SHANE LINDSAY BAILLIE

(plaintiff)

and

DONALD WAYNE JACKSON

(first defendant)

and

VICTORIA POINT SHARKS SPORTING CLUB INC

(second defendant)

FILE NO/S:

D3564/2011

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

20 February 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATES:

3-5 November 2014

JUDGE:

McGill DCJ

ORDER:

Judgment for the defendants

CATCHWORDS:

EMPLOYMENT LAW – Injury to employee – liability of employee – security officer punched at work - whether breach of duty – causation – employer not liable.

NEGLIGENCE – Breach of duty – occupier of licensed premises – whether duty to provide more security officers – causation – occupier not liable.

Adeels Palace Pty Ltd v Moubarak (2009) 239 CLR 420 – followed.
Czatyrko v Edith Cowan University (2005) 79 ALJR 839 – cited.
Karanfilov v MSS Security Pty Ltd [2013] QSC 304 – followed.
Koehler v Cerebos Australia Ltd (2005) 222 CLR 44 – cited.
Lusk v Sapwell [2011] QCA 59 – applied.
ModburyTriangle Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Anzil (2000) 205 CLR 254 – distinguished.
Packer v Tall Ships Sailing Cruises Aust Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 212 – cited.

COUNSEL:

P J Goodwin for the plaintiff

M T O’Sullivan for the first defendant

R W Morgan for the second defendant

SOLICITORS:

Murphy Schmidt for the plaintiff

McInnes Wilson Lawyers for the first defendant

HBM Lawyers for the second defendant

1. As might be expected, the second defendant operates a licensed club at Victoria Point.  As at September 2007 it had contracted with the first defendant to provide security services at the club premises: p 3-64.  On the evening of 8 September 2007, those services were being provided by the plaintiff who was then doing casual work for the first defendant as a security officer.  During the evening a wedding reception was held at the club, and late in the evening as some people who had attended the reception were leaving, one of them punched the plaintiff in the face causing fractures to his right zygoma.  Apart from his physical injuries, this led to a significant aggravation of a pre-existing psychiatric condition.  The plaintiff claims that those injuries were caused by the negligence of his employer, and of the club, or persons for whom it is vicariously liable.  Liability and quantum were both in issue.

Facts

1. The incident but not the actual blow was caught on a surveillance video in the foyer of the club: Exhibit 13.  It shows the plaintiff leaning over the reception desk talking to the receptionist who was on duty there as two men, guests at the reception, are leaving.  As the two men walk past the desk, they pause and one of them holds out his hand to the plaintiff, whose attention is attracted by them; he shakes hands in what appears to be a friendly exchange with the man, but immediately afterwards the man punched him in the face[1] and he fell back against the desk.  The man’s friend…