Johnson v Fraser Coast Regional Council - [2020] QDC 228

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Johnson v Fraser Coast Regional Council [2020] QDC 228

PARTIES:

CLINTON JAMIE JOHNSON
(plaintiff)

v

FRASER COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL
(defendant)

FILE NO/S:

138 of 2016

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

23 October 2020

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

24 - 28 August 2020,1 September 2020

JUDGE:

Loury QC DCJ

ORDER:

Judgement for the plaintiff in the sum of $349,548.07.

CATCHWORDS:

TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY – where plaintiff claims damages for an injury suffered at his employment with the defendant – where defendant denies injury occurred at work – where plaintiff had a pre-existing degenerative knee condition

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER – where plaintiff stepped on unstable tow-hitch to cover a load of asphalt – where plaintiff stepped down, and twisted knee – where defendant accepted that it had not enforced a system for covering asphalt – where plaintiff had complained to his supervisors of difficulties in covering asphalt

DAMAGES – MEASURE OF REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – LOSS OF EARNINGS AND EARNING CAPACITY – where event causing injury was minor – where minor injury aggravated pre-existing knee condition – where plaintiff would have had problems working in heavy labour in any event because of pre-existing injury – level of current impairment – discount which should apply for contingencies

Czatyrko v Edith Cowan University (2005) 214 ALR 349
Bevan v Wagner Industrial Services Pty Ltd [2017] QCA 246
Andar Transport Pty Ltd v Brambles Limited (2004) 217 CLR 424
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40
Meandarra Aerial Spraying Pty Ltd v GEJ and MA Geldard Pty Ltd (2013) 1 Qd R 319
Vairy v Wyong Shire Council (2005) 223 CLR 422
Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638, 642-643
McDonald v FAI General Insurance Co Ltd [1995] QCA 436
Stitz v Manpower Services Australia & Anor [2011] QSC 268
March v E & MH Stramare Pty Ltd (1999) 171 CLR 506

Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014 Sch 8 s 9
Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 ss 306O, 306P

COUNSEL:

RC Morton and JM Sorbello for the plaintiff
WDP Campbell for the defendant

SOLICITORS:

Morton & Morton Solicitors for the plaintiff
Jensen McConaghy Lawyers for the defendant

The plaintiff is now a 49 year old man. He was born in Maryborough and has spent the vast majority of his life living in Maryborough. He was educated to part way through year 11. He has a long-term partner and five children including a step-son. He has worked in manual labouring jobs for all of his working life until he suffered an injury to his knee in September 2014. He has not worked since.

The plaintiff was employed by the defendant. On 26 October 2015 his employment was terminated (effective 1 December 2015)[1] as he was no longer fit to…

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 Johnson v Fraser Coast Regional Council 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: [2020] QDC 228
Decision Date: 23 October 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Johnson v Fraser Coast Regional Council, the plaintiff, Johnson, sought damages for an injury he sustained while performing his employment duties with the defendant, Fraser Coast Regional Council. The injury occurred when Johnson stepped on an unstable tow-hitch to cover a load of asphalt, causing him to twist his knee. The Council denied that the injury occurred at work and contended that the injury was the result of a pre-existing degenerative knee condition. The case was heard in the District Court of Queensland.

The legal issues before the court were whether the injury occurred in the course of employment and, if so, whether the Council was negligent in not enforcing a system for covering asphalt loads. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate measure of damages for the injury, taking into account Johnson's pre-existing knee condition and the remoteness of the damage caused by the incident.

The court found that the injury did occur in the course of employment, and that the Council was negligent in not enforcing a system for covering asphalt. The court held that the Council was vicariously liable for the injury as it was caused by the plaintiff's actions while performing his employment duties. In assessing the damages, the court considered the minor nature of the incident and the aggravation of the plaintiff's pre-existing knee condition. The court also took into account the plaintiff's current level of impairment and the discount which should apply for contingencies. The court awarded the plaintiff damages in the sum of $349,548.07.

The final orders of the court were that the defendant, Fraser Coast Regional Council, pay the plaintiff, Johnson, the sum of $349,548.07 in damages for the injury sustained in the course of employment. The court held that the Council was vicariously liable for the injury, and that the measure of damages was appropriate given the circumstances of the case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Judgement for the plaintiff in the sum of $349,548.07.

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:	Johnson v Fraser Coast Regional Council [2020] QDC 228
PARTIES:	CLINTON JAMIE JOHNSON (plaintiff) v FRASER COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL (defendant)
FILE NO/S:	138 of 2016
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Trial
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	23 October 2020
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	24 - 28 August 2020,1 September 2020
JUDGE:	Loury QC DCJ
ORDER:	Judgement for the plaintiff in the sum of $349,548.07.
CATCHWORDS:	TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY – where plaintiff claims damages for an injury suffered at his employment with the defendant – where defendant denies injury occurred at work – where plaintiff had a pre-existing degenerative knee condition WORKERS’ COMPENSATION – LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER – where plaintiff stepped on unstable tow-hitch to cover a load of asphalt – where plaintiff stepped down, and twisted knee – where defendant accepted that it had not enforced a system for covering asphalt – where plaintiff had complained to his supervisors of difficulties in covering asphalt DAMAGES – MEASURE OF REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT – MEASURE OF DAMAGES – PERSONAL INJURIES – LOSS OF EARNINGS AND EARNING CAPACITY – where event causing injury was minor – where minor injury aggravated pre-existing knee condition – where plaintiff would have had problems working in heavy labour in any event because of pre-existing injury – level of current impairment – discount which should apply for contingencies Czatyrko v Edith Cowan University (2005) 214 ALR 349 Bevan v Wagner Industrial Services Pty Ltd [2017] QCA 246 Andar Transport Pty Ltd v Brambles Limited (2004) 217 CLR 424 Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40 Meandarra Aerial Spraying Pty Ltd v GEJ and MA Geldard Pty Ltd (2013) 1 Qd R 319 Vairy v Wyong Shire Council (2005) 223 CLR 422 Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1 Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 638, 642-643 McDonald v FAI General Insurance Co Ltd [1995] QCA 436 Stitz v Manpower Services Australia & Anor [2011] QSC 268 March v E & MH Stramare Pty Ltd (1999) 171 CLR 506 Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2014 Sch 8 s 9 Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 ss 306O, 306P
COUNSEL:	RC Morton and JM Sorbello for the plaintiff WDP Campbell for the defendant
SOLICITORS:	Morton & Morton Solicitors for the plaintiff Jensen McConaghy Lawyers for the defendant