Cootes v Concrete Panels

Case [2019] QSC 146

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Cootes v Concrete Panels & Ors [2019] QSC 146

PARTIES:

DARREN COOTES

(plaintiff)

v
CONCRETE PANELS (QLD) PTY LTD (ACN 152 691 720)

(first defendant)

AND

SMJ PROJECTS PTY LTD (ACN 119 460 418)

(second defendant)

AND

CAPABLE CONSTRUCTION (QLD) PTY LTD (ACN 159 427 004)

(third defendant)

FILE NO/S:

BS No 897 of 2017

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Claim

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

11 June 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Rockhampton

HEARING DATE:

27, 28, 29 and 30 May 2019

JUDGE:

Crow J

ORDER:

1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant in the sum of $548,612.95; and
2. Judgment for the plaintiff against the second and third defendants in the sum of $909,504.00.

CATCHWORDS:

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – DUTY OF CARE – SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS AND DUTIES – EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE –  where plaintiff suffered personal injury when an excavation collapsed upon him at a work site while he was retrieving a drill – where plaintiff brings proceedings against his former employer – where risk of injury resulting from the collapse of the excavation was foreseeable – where risk of injury was not insignificant – where a reasonable person would have taken precautions against the risk of injury – whether the employer has breached the duty of care owed to the plaintiff


TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY - where plaintiff suffered personal injury when an excavation collapsed upon him at a work site while he was retrieving a drill – whether the plaintiff failed to take precautions against the risk of the excavation face collapse – whether there ought to be a finding of contributory negligence


TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – DUTY OF CARE – OTHER CASES - where plaintiff suffered personal injury when an excavation collapsed upon him at a work site while he was retrieving a drill - where plaintiff brings proceedings against the principal contractor, and the project manager – where risk of injury was foreseeable – where content of duty of care required the use of reasonable care to avoid the unnecessary risk of injury caused by a collapse – where reasonable care required compliance with site safety plan – whether the principal contractor and project manager breached a duty owed to the plaintiff

DAMAGES – MEASURE AND REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – where plaintiff suffered personal injury when an excavation collapsed upon him at a work site while retrieving a drill – where plaintiff suffered a spinal injury and psychiatric harm as a result of the collapse – where defendant also suffers from an unrelated hip injury and cardiac condition - whether damages ought to be reduced as a result of unrelated conditions

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) s 305B, s S305D, S 305F, s S305H
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2003 (Qld)
Civil Proceedings Act 2011…

Continue reading Cootes v Concrete Panels

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cootes v Concrete Panels [2019] QSC 146
Case
[2019] QSC 146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cootes v Concrete Panels involved a dispute where the plaintiff, Mr. Cootes, brought an action against his former employer, Concrete Panels, along with the principal contractor and the project manager, alleging negligence resulting from an excavation collapse at a worksite. The plaintiff suffered a spinal injury and psychiatric harm after the excavation collapsed while he was retrieving a drill. The court was tasked with determining whether the defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and whether they breached that duty. The court also had to consider whether the plaintiff's own actions contributed to the injury.

The central legal issue was whether the defendants breached their duty of care towards the plaintiff. The court found that the risk of injury from the excavation collapse was foreseeable and not insignificant. The defendants were expected to take reasonable precautions to avoid such risks. The court held that the employer, the principal contractor, and the project manager all owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. The employer failed to ensure the excavation was properly shored up, while the principal contractor and the project manager did not adhere to the site safety plan, both amounting to breaches of their duty of care.

In addition to determining the breach of duty, the court also had to consider whether the plaintiff's contributory negligence should reduce his damages. The court concluded that the plaintiff did not contribute to the injury, and thus, his damages were not to be reduced on this basis. The court also considered the plaintiff's unrelated medical conditions in assessing damages but found they did not warrant a reduction in the compensation awarded. The court awarded the plaintiff a total of $548,612.95 against the employer and $909,504.00 against the principal contractor and project manager.

The final orders were that Mr. Cootes was to receive $548,612.95 from Concrete Panels and $909,504.00 from the principal contractor and the project manager, reflecting the court's findings on the liability and extent of damages.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Judgment for the plaintiff against the first defendant in the sum of $548,612.95; and

2. Judgment for the plaintiff against the second and third defendants in the sum of $909,504.00.

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.