Pascoe v Coolum Resort Pty Ltd

Link copied
Case Copied 17 min read

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Pascoe v Coolum Resort Pty Ltd [2005] QDC 039

PARTIES:

DIANA URSULA PASCOE
Plaintiff

COOLUM RESORT PTY LTD
Defendant

FILE NO/S:

D79/2004

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Claim for damages for personal injuries

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court Maroochydore

DELIVERED ON:

4 March 2005

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

3 February 2005

JUDGE:

Samios DCJ

ORDER:

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for
$132,602.68

CATCHWORDS:

Negligence – employment law - personal injuries – breach of statutory duty.
Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 section 28(1); Bankstown Foundry Pty Ltd v Braistina (1986) 160 CLR 301, 308-9;
Hamilton v Nuroof W.A. Pty Ltd (1956) 96 CLR 18, 25;
Schiliro v Peppercorn Childcare CentresPty Ltd No. 2 (2001) 1 Qd R 518, 522);

Vozza v Tooth & Co Ltd (1964) 112 CLR 316;

Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1979-80) 146 CLR 40 at 47.

COUNSEL:

Mr Grant-Taylor SC for Plaintiff

Mr McDougall for Defendant

SOLICITORS:

Schultz Toomey O’Brien for Plaintiff

McInnes Wilson for Defendant

  1. The plaintiff’s claim against the defendant is for damages for personal injuries, loss and damage caused by the negligence of the defendant, its servants or agents and/or breach of contract of employment by the defendant, its servants or agents and/or breach of statutory duty by the defendant, its servants or agents.

  1. The plaintiff was born on 6 December 1966. 

  1. The defendant carries on the business of the Hyatt Regency Coolum at Warran Road, Yaroomba, Queensland (the resort).  The defendant employed the plaintiff there as a housekeeper.

  1. The plaintiff’s evidence was that at about 2:20pm on 30 January 2002 at the resort the plaintiff, with two other employees of the defendant, were putting a cleaning trolley away in the Lakes Lounge.  Having put the trolley away the plaintiff and the two other employees of the defendant walked down a driveway and came to a point where the driveway met a roadway.  The plaintiff said she looked to her left and she went to go around the corner when her ankle got into the edge and her ankle went down.  The plaintiff said her knee caught the whole of the cement on the other side where the “big hole” was.  The plaintiff fell down and completely lost feeling to her leg (the accident).  The plaintiff described the hole as a deep hole 15 to 20cms deep and about 35 to 40cms in diameter.  The hole was adjacent to the path.

  1. The plaintiff claims the injuries she suffered in her fall included injuries to her left ankle, left foot, left hip and left knee.  The plaintiff also claims to have suffered psychological consequences.

  1. One of the two employees with whom the plaintiff was walking before she fell and suffered her injuries was Annette Louise De Roia.  Ms De Roia recalled that on 30 January 2002, while she was working in the team with the plaintiff, the plaintiff fell over in a pothole.  Ms De Roia turned around to see the plaintiff on the ground…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Pascoe v Coolum Resort Pty Ltd 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
[2005] QDC 39
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Pascoe v Coolum Resort Pty Ltd involved a claim for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, Pascoe, while she was employed at the defendant's resort. The plaintiff alleged that she suffered injuries due to the negligence of the resort and a breach of statutory duty. The dispute was heard and determined in the District Court of Queensland. The plaintiff sought damages for her injuries and losses, including medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the resort breached their duty of care owed to the plaintiff under common law principles of negligence and whether the resort contravened any statutory obligations that resulted in the plaintiff's injuries. The court also had to assess the extent of the plaintiff's injuries, the causation of those injuries, and the appropriate quantum of damages. The court considered evidence from medical experts, workplace safety regulations, and the circumstances surrounding the incident.

The court found that the resort had indeed breached their duty of care by failing to provide a safe working environment and by not adhering to relevant safety regulations. The evidence demonstrated that the resort knew or ought to have known about the risks posed by the equipment involved in the incident. The court further found that the breach of duty directly caused the plaintiff's injuries. In determining the damages, the court awarded the plaintiff compensation for her medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering, totaling $132,602.68.

The court issued a judgment in favour of the plaintiff, Pascoe, against the defendant, Coolum Resort Pty Ltd. The judgment included an order for the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of $132,602.68 in damages. The court also noted that the statutory duty breached was a significant factor in the outcome, highlighting the importance of compliance with occupational health and safety regulations in the workplace.

Orders

Orders of the court

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for

$132,602.68

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.