Suresh v Jacon Industries Pty Ltd

[2005] NSWCA 202

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Negligence
2. › Employer's duty of care
3. › Safe system of work
4. › Hazardous task
5. › Failure to provide sufficient instruction as to nature and extent of hazards
6. › Whether employer breached duty by failing to warn experienced employee of specific hazards beyond employee's training or experience
1. Negligence
2. › Contributory negligence
3. › Employee's failure to take precautions
4. › Whether contributory negligence established where hazard not shown to be within employee's training or experience
5. › Whether failure to use emergency stop button constituted contributory negligence in unexpected emergency
1. Negligence
2. › Employer's duty of care
3. › Competent employee
4. › Whether employer entitled to rely on competence of experienced employee without providing specific hazard warnings
5. › Compensation to Relatives Act 1897 (NSW)

Quick Take

An employer's knowledge that a task is hazardous creates a duty to give specific instruction about the nature and extent of the hazard, even to an experienced and competent employee, where the hazard extends beyond the reasonable limits of the employee's expertise. The fact that the means of reducing the hazard are within the employee's competence does not discharge the employer's duty if the employee does not appreciate the need to adopt them. Contributory negligence cannot be established merely by showing the employee failed to take precautions, absent evidence that the hazard was within the employee's training or experience.