Cole v Franklins Ltd

Cole was the appellant and Franklins Ltd was the respondent. The appellant alleged that she suffered injury to her left arm and shoulder as a result of her employment as a checkout operator at the respondent's supermarket. She claimed that the high rate of customer service and the handling of heavy goods, as well as her specific handling technique, constituted breaches of the respondent's duty of care, leading to her injury. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in finding that the appellant had failed to prove causation between the alleged breaches of duty by the respondent and her injury. Specifically, the court considered whether the medical evidence presented adequately established that the appellant's employment activities were the cause of her pain and injury.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial judge's finding that causation had not been proven. The judges reasoned that the medical evidence did not establish a sufficient link between the appellant's work and her condition. They concluded that no error had been demonstrated in the trial judge's assessment of the evidence, particularly the medical evidence, which was crucial for establishing the causal connection required for a finding of negligence.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.