Bergin v Queensland Cork and Timber Solutions Pty Ltd - [2019] QDC 141

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Bergin v Queensland Cork & Timber Solutions Pty Ltd [2019] QDC 141

PARTIES:

BERGIN, Christopher William
(Plaintiff)

v

Queensland Cork & Timber Solutions Pty Ltd (ACN 109 658 335)
(Defendant)

FILE NO/S:

DC 0407 of 2018

DIVISION:

District Court

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

8 August 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17-18, 24 June 2019

JUDGE:

Loury QC DCJ

ORDER:

1.   Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.

2.   Judgment for the defendant.

3.   I will hear the parties as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – DUTY OF CARE – STANDARD OF CARE – CAUSATION – AS BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE – dispute as to liability and quantum – where the plaintiff was employed as a floor sander for the defendant – whether the defendant breached its duty of care – whether the risk of injury to the plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable – whether the injury suffered was caused by the defendant’s breach of its duty

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – EMPLOYMENT RELATED INJURY, DISABILITY OR DISEASE – ARISING IN COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT – where the plaintiff had previously injured his left arm in a 2006 workplace accident – where the plaintiff’s right hand suffered an injury – whether the defendant is liable for the plaintiff’s physical injury and psychiatric injury – whether the psychiatric injury was pre-existing

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld), s 305B, s 305C, s 305D, s 305E

Czatryko v Edith Cowan University (2005) 79 ALJR 839
Meandarra Aerial Spraying Pty Ltd v GEJ and MA Geldard Pty Ltd (2013) 1 Qd R 319, cited
Rudd v Starbucks Coffee Company (Australia) Pty Ltd [2015] QDC 232, cited
Stitz v Manpower Services and Anor [2011] QSC 268, cited
Stokes v House with No Steps [2016] QSC 79, cited
Vairy v Wyong Shire Council (2005) 223 CLR 422, cited
Vozza v Tooth & Co Ltd (1964) 112 CLR 316, cited
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40, cited

COUNSEL:

C Newton for the Plaintiff

B Charrington for the Defendant

SOLICITORS:

Maurice Blackburn for the Plaintiff

HopgoodGanim Lawyers for the Defendant

Background

On 3 November 2006, the plaintiff, then aged 26 years, suffered an injury to his left hand at work in New South Wales. As a result his flexor tendon and radial nerve were lacerated and required surgical repair. He had ongoing problems with the whole of his arm and he was ultimately diagnosed with chronic regional pain syndrome in his left hand and arm. The injury gave rise to a depressive illness. The plaintiff brought a claim for common law damages in New South Wales for both the chronic regional pain syndrome and psychiatric illness on the basis that the injuries resulted in significant incapacity for work. The settlement he received was for a gross amount of $475 000 which was paid to his then solicitors in October 2008. The plaintiff also received amounts of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Bergin v Queensland Cork and Timber Solutions Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2019] QDC 141
Decision Date: 8 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Bergin v Queensland Cork and Timber Solutions Pty Ltd, the plaintiff alleged negligence against the defendant, his employer, for injuries sustained in the course of his employment as a floor sander. The plaintiff, who had previously injured his left arm in a 2006 workplace accident, sustained a new injury to his right hand during his employment with the defendant. The dispute centred on whether the defendant had breached its duty of care, whether the risk of injury to the plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable, and whether the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by the defendant's breach. The plaintiff also sought compensation for a psychiatric injury, arguing that it was a result of the physical injury sustained in the course of employment.

The court was required to determine whether the risk of injury to the plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable and whether the defendant had breached its duty of care. The court also had to decide if the injury suffered by the plaintiff was caused by the defendant's breach and if the plaintiff's psychiatric injury arose out of the physical injury sustained during the course of employment. The court had to assess the pre-existing nature of the plaintiff's psychiatric condition, if any, and its connection to the workplace incident.

The court found that the defendant did not breach its duty of care owed to the plaintiff. The risk of injury to the plaintiff was not reasonably foreseeable, and the injuries sustained were not caused by the defendant's breach. Additionally, the court ruled that the plaintiff's psychiatric injury was pre-existing and not a result of the workplace incident. Consequently, the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed, and judgment was entered in favour of the defendant. The court reserved its decision on costs pending further submissions from the parties.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.

2. Judgment for the defendant.

3. I will hear the parties as to costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Bergin v Queensland Cork & Timber Solutions Pty Ltd [2019] QDC 141
PARTIES:	BERGIN, Christopher William (Plaintiff) v Queensland Cork & Timber Solutions Pty Ltd (ACN 109 658 335) (Defendant)
FILE NO/S:	DC 0407 of 2018
DIVISION:	District Court
PROCEEDING:	Trial
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	8 August 2019
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	17-18, 24 June 2019
JUDGE:	Loury QC DCJ
ORDER:	1. Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed. 2. Judgment for the defendant. 3. I will hear the parties as to costs.
CATCHWORDS:	TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – DUTY OF CARE – STANDARD OF CARE – CAUSATION – AS BETWEEN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE – dispute as to liability and quantum – where the plaintiff was employed as a floor sander for the defendant – whether the defendant breached its duty of care – whether the risk of injury to the plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable – whether the injury suffered was caused by the defendant’s breach of its duty WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – EMPLOYMENT RELATED INJURY, DISABILITY OR DISEASE – ARISING IN COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT – where the plaintiff had previously injured his left arm in a 2006 workplace accident – where the plaintiff’s right hand suffered an injury – whether the defendant is liable for the plaintiff’s physical injury and psychiatric injury – whether the psychiatric injury was pre-existing Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld), s 305B, s 305C, s 305D, s 305E Czatryko v Edith Cowan University (2005) 79 ALJR 839 Meandarra Aerial Spraying Pty Ltd v GEJ and MA Geldard Pty Ltd (2013) 1 Qd R 319, cited Rudd v Starbucks Coffee Company (Australia) Pty Ltd [2015] QDC 232, cited Stitz v Manpower Services and Anor [2011] QSC 268, cited Stokes v House with No Steps [2016] QSC 79, cited Vairy v Wyong Shire Council (2005) 223 CLR 422, cited Vozza v Tooth & Co Ltd (1964) 112 CLR 316, cited Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40, cited
COUNSEL:	C Newton for the Plaintiff B Charrington for the Defendant
SOLICITORS:	Maurice Blackburn for the Plaintiff HopgoodGanim Lawyers for the Defendant