Moyes v Ensco Australia Pty Ltd

The case of Moyes v Ensco Australia Pty Ltd involved an appeal by William Moyes against the orders of Petrusa DCJ dismissing his action in the District Court. Moyes claimed damages for injuries and loss resulting from a fall at work in January 2012, which he alleged was caused by the negligence of ENSCO Australia Pty Ltd. The primary judge found that Moyes had not established that the fall had caused the physical and psychiatric injuries he alleged, and dismissed his action. In this appeal, Moyes contended that the primary judge erred in law by finding, in the absence of any evidence, that the force with which he fell did not cause disturbance of the sensorial nerves and associated nociplastic pain, and by finding this when his evidence on the topic and on the topic of 'medical causation' was not challenged at trial or put to him in cross-examination. The Court of Appeal found that Moyes had not established any error of law as alleged, and dismissed the appeal. The appeal was dismissed because the findings of fact were substantially based on credibility, and the principles of appellate restraint applied. The judge's findings were consistent with the evidence presented at trial, and the medical evidence relied on by Moyes was based on his self-reporting of symptoms and capacities. The Court of Appeal found no error of law in the primary judge's reasoning and outcome.