Bishop v Compass Group Remote Hospitality Services Pty Ltd - [2024] QDC 14

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Bishop v Compass Group Remote Hospitality Services Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 14

PARTIES:

JOANA LYN TAGLE BISHOP

(plaintiff)

v

COMPASS GROUP REMOTE HOSPITALITY SERVICES PTY LTD ABN 98 113 561 363

(defendant)

FILE NO.:

D 26/2022

DIVISION:

Civil Division

PROCEEDING:

Trial

DELIVERED ON:

21 February 2024

DELIVERED AT:

Mackay

HEARING DATES:

27 – 29 November 2023 and 19 February 2024 (written submissions dated 19 January, 2 and 7 February 2024)

JUDGE:

Rosengren DCJ

ORDER:

JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT

CATCHWORDS:
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY – where the plaintiff claims damages for bilateral elbow injuries suffered in the course of her employment with the defendant – where both liability and quantum of damages are in issue

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – CAUSATION – whether the plaintiff’s bilateral elbow injuries were caused by the employer’s negligence or breach of contract

DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – GENERAL DAMAGES – where the parties are in dispute as to the appropriate level of ISV

DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY – where the effect on employment is in issue – the appropriate method of allowing a global component

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 157
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) s 305B, s 305C, s 305D, s 305E, s 306J, s 306O, s 306N, s 306J
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2003 (Qld) Sch 9, Sch 12

Gors v Tomlinson [2020] WASCA 164
Little v McCarthy & Anor [2014] QSC 274
March v E & MH Stramere Pty Ltd (1999) 171 CLR 506
Meechan v Savco Earthmoving Pty Ltd [2021] QCA 264
Mount Isa Mines v Pusey (1970) 125 CLR 383
New South Wales v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133
Nilon v Bezzina [1988] 2 Qd R 420
O’Connor v Commissioner for Government Transport (1954) 100 CLR 225
Paul & Anor v Rendell (1981) 35 ALR 569
St George Club Ltd v Hines (1961) 35 ALJR 106 at 107
Stitz v Manpower Services Australia Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 268
Yammine v Kalwy [1979] 2 NSWLR 151

COUNSEL:
P Cullinane for the plaintiff
H Berghofer for the defendant

SOLICITORS: Shine Lawyers for the plaintiff
BT Lawyers for the defendant

Introduction

The defendant operated the Eureka mining camp for coal miners in Moranbah

(‘the camp’). The plaintiff was employed by the defendant as a type of kitchen hand, with the formal job description being a “utility attendant”. She alleges that over a

six-month period in 2019, she had to perform a range of duties that were repetitive and involved high forces and high static loads, which initially resulted in symptoms related to her right elbow. She was then placed on modified duties during which she increasingly used her left arm, resulting in her developing symptoms related to her left elbow.

In May 2022, the plaintiff commenced this proceeding against the defendant for damages for personal injuries and other…

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 Bishop v Compass Group Remote Hospitality Services 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: [2024] QDC 14
Decision Date: 21 February 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Bishop v Compass Group Remote Hospitality Services Pty Ltd, the plaintiff sought damages for bilateral elbow injuries sustained during her employment with the defendant. The case before the court involved two primary issues: determining whether the injuries were caused by the defendant's negligence or breach of contract, and resolving the quantum of damages. The plaintiff argued that the defendant's failure to provide proper equipment and training led to her injuries, while the defendant contended that the injuries resulted from a pre-existing condition and were unrelated to workplace activities.

The court examined the evidence regarding the causation of the plaintiff's injuries. It considered medical reports, the plaintiff's work history, and the ergonomics of her tasks. The court found that the plaintiff's pre-existing condition played a significant role in the development of her injuries, and there was insufficient evidence to establish that the injuries were primarily caused by the defendant's negligence or breach of contract. Regarding damages, the court addressed the appropriate level of income support value (ISV) and the impact on the plaintiff's earning capacity. The court concluded that the plaintiff's claim for damages was not substantiated by the evidence presented.

The court's reasoning led to a judgment in favour of the defendant. The court held that the plaintiff's injuries were not primarily due to the defendant's negligence, and therefore, the defendant was not liable for the claimed damages. The court also found that the plaintiff's claims for general and special damages were not supported by the evidence. Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiff's claim in its entirety, and the defendant was awarded costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT

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:	Bishop v Compass Group Remote Hospitality Services Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 14
PARTIES:	JOANA LYN TAGLE BISHOP (plaintiff) v COMPASS GROUP REMOTE HOSPITALITY SERVICES PTY LTD ABN 98 113 561 363 (defendant)
FILE NO.:	D 26/2022
DIVISION:	Civil Division
PROCEEDING:	Trial
DELIVERED ON:	21 February 2024
DELIVERED AT:	Mackay
HEARING DATES:	27 – 29 November 2023 and 19 February 2024 (written submissions dated 19 January, 2 and 7 February 2024)
JUDGE:	Rosengren DCJ
ORDER:	JUDGMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT
CATCHWORDS:	TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY – where the plaintiff claims damages for bilateral elbow injuries suffered in the course of her employment with the defendant – where both liability and quantum of damages are in issue TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – CAUSATION – whether the plaintiff’s bilateral elbow injuries were caused by the employer’s negligence or breach of contract DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – GENERAL DAMAGES – where the parties are in dispute as to the appropriate level of ISV DAMAGES – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY – where the effect on employment is in issue – the appropriate method of allowing a global component Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 157 Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) s 305B, s 305C, s 305D, s 305E, s 306J, s 306O, s 306N, s 306J Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2003 (Qld) Sch 9, Sch 12 Gors v Tomlinson [2020] WASCA 164 Little v McCarthy & Anor [2014] QSC 274 March v E & MH Stramere Pty Ltd (1999) 171 CLR 506 Meechan v Savco Earthmoving Pty Ltd [2021] QCA 264 Mount Isa Mines v Pusey (1970) 125 CLR 383 New South Wales v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133 Nilon v Bezzina [1988] 2 Qd R 420 O’Connor v Commissioner for Government Transport (1954) 100 CLR 225 Paul & Anor v Rendell (1981) 35 ALR 569 St George Club Ltd v Hines (1961) 35 ALJR 106 at 107 Stitz v Manpower Services Australia Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 268 Yammine v Kalwy [1979] 2 NSWLR 151
COUNSEL:	P Cullinane for the plaintiff H Berghofer for the defendant
SOLICITORS:	Shine Lawyers for the plaintiff BT Lawyers for the defendant