Suresh v Jacon Industries Pty Ltd

The appellant, Mrs Kumada Suresh, as the widow of the deceased, appealed to the Court against a judgment of the District Court which dismissed her claim for damages against the respondent, Jacon Industries Pty Ltd, under the Compensation to Relatives Act 1897 (NSW). The claim was based on the respondent's alleged negligence causing the death of her husband while operating a computerised numerical control metal turning lathe.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the respondent employer owed a duty of care to the deceased employee to provide a safe system of work, and if so, whether that duty was breached by failing to take reasonable steps to provide sufficient instruction regarding the hazards associated with the operation of the lathe, particularly concerning the excessive length of an unsupported metal rod protruding from the machine. The Court also considered whether the deceased was contributorily negligent, and if so, whether any such negligence should reduce the damages awarded.

The Court reasoned that while the deceased was a competent and experienced machinist, and the task itself was relatively uncomplicated, the operation of the lathe with a long, unsupported rod spinning at high speed presented a significant hazard. This hazard was acknowledged by the respondent's supervisor. The Court found that the employer had a duty to ensure the deceased was aware of the nature of this hazard and the means to mitigate it, even if the deceased possessed the skills to implement those mitigations. As the respondent led no evidence to demonstrate it had taken reasonable steps to warn the deceased of the specific hazard or to ensure his understanding of the risks, the Court inferred that no such warnings or instructions were given. The Court concluded that the employer had breached its duty of care.

The appeal was allowed, and the judgment of the District Court was set aside. Judgment was entered for the appellant against the respondent, with the matter remitted to the District Court for the assessment of damages payable to the appellant without any reduction for contributory negligence. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.