SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Sally Alanna McKay v Crowther & Ors [2000] QSC 148 PARTIES: SALLY ALANNA McKAY
(plaintiff)
v
LUCY BLAIR CROWTHER
(first defendant)
and
JUDITH MAY CAESAR
(second defendant)
CRAIG KENNETH BROWN on his own behalf and as Executor of the Estate of DAPHNE DOREEN BROWN
(third defendant)
and
KINROSS NURSING HOME PTY LTD
ACN 010 141 358
(fourth defendant)FILE NO/S: 1710 of 1992 DIVISION: Trial Division DELIVERED ON: 26 May 2000 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 22 February 2000 JUDGE: Douglas J ORDER: Judgement for the Defendant with costs to be assessed CATCHWORDS: TORTS - NEGLIGENCE - PROOF OF NEGLIGENCE - GENERALLY - plaintiff/assistant nurse injured back while employed at defendants’ Nursing Home - plaintiff previously diagnosed with spinal kyphosis - whether defendants in breach of duty.
DAMAGES - MEASURE AND REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN ACTIONS FOR TORT - REMOTENESS AND CAUSATION - PROOF OF CAUSATION - whether sufficient nexus between plaintiff’s work practices and plaintiff’s pain and suffering - conflict between medical witnesses.
McGhee v National Coal Board [1973] 1 WLR 1
Sherman v Nymboida Collieries Pty Limited (1964) 109 CLR 580COUNSEL: Mr C Newton for the plaintiff
Mr M T O’Sullivan or the first, second, third and fourth defendants.
SOLICITORS: Carter Capner for the plaintiff
O’Shea Corser Wadley for the first, second, third and fourth defendants
Douglas J: The plaintiff, Sally Alanna McKay, was born on 25 March 1966. At the age of 15 she was diagnosed as having a spinal kyphosis. As a result she wore a spinal brace for a period of about three years.
During this period she attended a one week work experience program at premises known as Kinross Nursing Home (“the Nursing Home”) where she advised the then proprietors that she had been treated for a kyphosis, and informed them that she was in fact wearing a spinal brace.
She left school at the age of 17 having completed year 12 in 1983. For a short period she was employed at a video store but on 10 February 1984 she was first employed by the first defendant. The first defendant was then the proprietor of the Nursing Home. On 15 March 1985 the second defendant, Judith Caesar, took over the Nursing Home licence from the first defendant. The plaintiff’s employment with the first defendant ceased in May 1985 when her employment began with the second defendant and the third defendant. She was employed as an assistant in nursing. On 1 August 1985 she acquired a certificate of achievement as an assistant in nursing. The third defendant, Daphne Brown, died in October 1987 and as a result her son, Craig Brown, became involved in the plaintiff’s employment. She remained at the Nursing Home as an assistant nurse/kitchen domestic until 23 September 1989 when she took an overseas vacation. In the meantime she was also employed at the Country Club Hotel at Strathpine as a bar assistant from time to time. The plaintiff returned to work at the Nursing…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Sally Alanna McKay v Crowther 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2000] QSC 148
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the defendants were negligent in their duty of care and, if so, whether the plaintiff's injuries were a direct result of that negligence. The court also had to consider whether there was a sufficient nexus between the plaintiff's work practices and the pain and suffering experienced, particularly in light of the conflicting medical evidence presented.
The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendants were negligent in their duty of care, and that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate a causal link between the plaintiff's work practices and the pain and suffering experienced. The court relied on the precedent set in McGhee v National Coal Board and Sherman v Nymboida Collieries Pty Limited to determine the appropriate measure and remoteness of damages. The court concluded that the plaintiff was unable to prove causation, and therefore, the plaintiff's claim was dismissed. The defendants were awarded costs to be assessed.
The court's judgement resulted in a dismissal of the plaintiff's claim for damages, and an order for the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
Judgement for the Defendant with costs to be assessed
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.