Madden v Kingston Industries

In *Madden v Kingston Industries*, the appellant, an employee, appealed a District Court judgment concerning injuries sustained to his back. The dispute arose from the appellant's claim that his employer, the respondent, had breached its duty of care to provide a safe system of work. The proceedings involved two distinct causes of action: the cumulative effect of strenuous effort over several weeks and the respondent's alleged failure to train the appellant in the proper use of a wheelbarrow.

The court was required to determine whether the employer had breached its duty of care by failing to consider reasonable steps to remove or minimise foreseeable risks of injury. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether a retrial should be refused on the grounds that the appellant's total claim, even if divided equally between the two causes of action, would not meet the threshold stipulated in s 151G(4) of the *Workers Compensation Act 1987* (NSW), or that neither cause of action independently caused an injury exceeding 17% of a most extreme case.

The appellate court allowed the appeal, setting aside the District Court's judgment in favour of the respondent. The matter was remitted to the District Court for a retrial. The costs of the first trial were ordered to abide the outcome of the second trial, while the respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal. The respondent was also granted a certificate under the *Suitors’ Fund Act 1951* (NSW), provided they met the eligibility criteria.