Meechan v Savco Earthmoving Pty Ltd

[2021] QCA 264

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Meechan v Savco Earthmoving Pty Ltd [2021] QCA 264

PARTIES:

GRAYSON GEORGE MEECHAN
(applicant/appellant)
v
SAVCO EARTHMOVING PTY LTD
ACN 103 377 715
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 2458 of 2021
DC No 382 of 2019

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane – [2021] QDC 14 (Sheridan DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

3 December 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

26 July 2021

JUDGES:

Fraser and McMurdo and Bond JJA

ORDERS:

1.   Grant leave to appeal.

2.   Allow the appeal.

3.   Set aside the orders made on 5 February 2021.

4.   Give judgment for the appellant against the respondent in the sum of $103,741.91.

5.   Order the respondent to pay to the appellant his costs of the proceeding in the District Court and of this appeal.

CATCHWORDS:

TORTS – GENERALLY – NEGLIGENCE – DAMAGE AND CAUSATION – GENERALLY – where the appellant was injured whilst working as an employee for the respondent’s subcontractor – where the trial judge found the respondent to be negligent – where the trial judge found that the respondent’s negligence was not the cause of the appellant’s injury – whether the trial judge erred in concluding that the respondent’s negligence was not the cause of the appellant’s injury

TORTS – GENERALLY – NEGLIGENCE – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – GENERALLY – where the trial judge found that the appellant’s responsibility for his injuries would have been 80 per cent – whether the appellant should bear a greater responsibility for the accident than the respondent

DAMAGES – ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN TORT – PERSONAL INJURY – GENERALLY – where the trial judge assessed general damages to be $10,000 and did not award damages for future economic loss – whether the trial judge should have awarded further general damages to account for the prospect of developing osteoarthritis – whether there should have been an award for future economic loss

Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1; [1995] HCA 5, applied
Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 16; [1986] HCA 1, applied

COUNSEL:

R J Lynch and N I Congram for the applicant/appellant
M Grant-Taylor QC, with E J Williams, for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Gouldson Legal for the applicant/appellant
Jensen McConaghy Lawyers for the respondent

1. FRASER JA:  I agree with the reasons for judgment of McMurdo JA and the orders proposed by his Honour.

2. McMURDO JA:  The appellant, Mr Meechan, was injured when working at a construction site in 2014.  He was standing on the tray of a truck, assisting in the placement on the truck of some machinery, which had been lifted to the truck by an excavator owned by the respondent company, which I will call Savco.

3. The excavator’s boom unexpectedly swung towards Mr Meechan, striking him and knocking him from the truck to the ground, when he suffered his injury.

4. The excavator was operated not by one of Savco’s employees, but by…