Onetech Pty Ltd v Shaw

Onetech Pty Ltd, the appellant, sought to appeal against a decision that found it had not been negligent in the injuries suffered by Mr Shaw, the respondent, who had slipped on the floor of a vessel. The Federal Circuit Court of Australia originally dismissed Onetech's appeal against a decision of the Federal Court, finding that the vessel's cabin floor was not a hazard. Onetech also appealed against the damages awarded, and Mr Shaw cross-appealed on the basis that the award of damages was inadequate. The Full Court of the Federal Court heard the appeal and cross-appeal.

The main legal issue before the court was whether Onetech was negligent in failing to provide a safe place of work. The court considered whether the cabin floor constituted a hazard under Australian and New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4831:2008. The court also had to determine whether Mr Shaw was contributorily negligent. The final issue was the calculation of damages, particularly in relation to loss of earning capacity and the correct deduction for income tax.

The court found that the cabin floor was not a hazard and that Onetech had not breached its duty of care. The court held that the standard did not apply to the cabin floor, and the vessel's design and layout did not create an obvious hazard. The court found that Mr Shaw's actions contributed to his injury and reduced the damages by 25%. The court held that the primary judge was correct to deduct 15% of the damages for contingencies but erred in deducting 2.75% for income tax. The court increased the award of damages from $540,781 to $606,781.

The appeal and cross-appeal on liability were dismissed. The appeal on damages was allowed, and the award of damages was increased from $540,781 to $606,781.