Vukelic v Glad Cleaning Service

The appellant, Ms. Vukelic, sued her employer, Glad Cleaning Service, for personal injuries sustained at work. Ms. Vukelic was injured when, while cleaning on her hands and knees, she quickly stood up and struck her head on a white box protruding from a wall. She contended that her employer had breached its duty of care by failing to supply her with an extension tube that would have allowed her to clean while standing. The trial judge dismissed her claim, and Ms. Vukelic appealed this decision to the Court of Appeal.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether Ms. Vukelic had demonstrated that her employer had breached its duty of reasonable care. This involved considering whether the employer ought to have provided an extension tube as a reasonable precaution against the risk of injury. The court also considered, but ultimately found to be irrelevant to the outcome, issues raised concerning the denial of an interpreter and the substitution of a photograph during the proceedings.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial judge's decision. The court reasoned that Ms. Vukelic had not established a breach of duty by her employer. The evidence did not demonstrate that the employer had failed to take reasonable care for her safety. The court found that the employer's duty of care did not extend to supplying an extension tube in these circumstances. Furthermore, any issues relating to the interpreter or the photograph did not affect the substantive outcome of the case. The appeal was dismissed with costs.