Cross v Moreton Bay Regional Council

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Cross v Moreton Bay Regional Council [2013] QSC 215

PARTIES:

PETER JOHN CROSS
(plaintiff)

v

MORETON BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL (FORMERLY CABOOLTURE SHIRE COUNCIL)
(first defendant)

AND

ROBERT WILLIAM PAULGER AND WENDY ANNE PAULGER
(third defendant)

FILE NO/S:

BS 10036 of 2010

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Trial

DELIVERED ON:

30 July 2013

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 – 21 March 2013

JUDGE:

Jackson J

ORDERS:

The judgment of the court is that:

the plaintiff’s claim against the third defendant is dismissed.1.   

the parties provide minutes of the judgment proposed for the plaintiff’s claim against the first defendant and for orders for costs.2.   

CATCHWORDS:

EMPLOYMENT LAW – LIABILITY AT COMMON LAW FOR INJURY AT WORK – INJURY OCCURRING IN COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT – where the plaintiff worked for the defendant maintaining roads and adjacent areas – where the plaintiff was required to ascend and descend from the tray of a truck in the course of his employment – whether the plaintiff slipped off the step of the truck and sustained a back injury

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – DUTY OF CARE – SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS AND DUTIES – EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE – where the plaintiff was required to ascend and descend from the tray of a truck, in the course of employment – where the plaintiff slipped off the step of the tray and sustained a back injury – whether the employer breached its duty of care for failing to provide safe access from the tray of the truck – whether the employer provided equipment that fell below the standard of care required

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – DANGEROUS AND INJURIOUS THINGS, ETC – BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE – where custom tray builder manufactured a tipping tray of truck to specification – where the manufacturer included a non-slip surface on the access step of the tray – where non-slip surface not maintained on the step at the time of the plaintiff’s injury – whether the manufacturer breached its duty of care to the plaintiff, as a user of the truck, in failing to provide other protective access systems

Adelaide Chemical and Fertilizer Co Ltd v Carlyle (1940) 64 CLR 514; [1940] HCA 44, cited

Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd v GSF Australia Pty Ltd (2005) 221 CLR 568; [2005] HCA 26, cited

AMACA Pty Ltd v Booth (2011) 246 CLR 36; [2011] HCA 53, considered
Bankstown Foundry Pty Ltd v Braistina (1986) 160 CLR 301 at 307; [1986] HCA 20, cited
Bennett v Minister of Community Welfare (1992) 176 CLR 408 at 416; [1992] HCA 27, cited
Betts v Whittingslowe (1945) 71 CLR 637 at 649; [1945] HCA 31, cited
Bull v Rover Mowers (Aust) Pty Ltd [1984] 2 Qd R 489, cited
Cameron v Foster [2010] QSC 372, considered
Chappel v Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232; [1998] HCA 55, cited
Coregas Pty Ltd v Penford Australia Pty Ltd