Thompson v Woolworths (Q'land) P/L

In Thompson v Woolworths (Q'land) P/L, the Court of Appeal heard an appeal against a decision that found the appellant, a delivery driver, not liable for the injuries sustained by the respondent, a bakery employee, when the respondent injured their back while moving bins at the respondent’s premises. The respondent claimed that the appellant, as the independent contractor delivering bread, was negligent in allowing the respondent to move the bins without assistance, leading to the injury. The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the appellant owed a duty of care to the respondent and whether the obviousness of the risk involved limited this duty.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles of vicarious liability and the nature of the duty of care owed by an independent contractor. The court found that the appellant did not owe a duty of care to the respondent because the risk of injury was obvious, and the respondent was aware of the risk. The Court held that the appellant’s duty of care was not breached, as the risk was open and obvious, and the respondent could have reasonably taken steps to avoid the injury. Furthermore, the court determined that the appellant was not liable for the respondent’s injury as the risk was apparent, and the respondent had the opportunity to avoid the injury.

As a result of the findings, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and entered judgment in favour of the appellant against the respondent. The respondent was ordered to pay the appellant’s costs of and incidental to the appeal and the proceeding at first instance, to be assessed. This decision highlights the importance of the obviousness of the risk and the duty of care owed by an independent contractor in cases involving injuries on the premises.