In Vitro Technologies Pty Ltd v Taylor

[2011] QCA 44

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort Law
2. › Negligence
3. › Employer's liability
4. › Safe workplace
5. › Duty to investigate employee complaints about safety of equipment
6. › Whether employer negligent in directing continued use of equipment after complaints
1. Appeal
2. › Interference with trial judge's findings of fact
3. › Credibility findings
4. › Functions of appellate court
5. › Whether appellate court should disturb findings based on assessment of oral evidence
1. Appeal
2. › Adequacy of reasons
3. › Failure to give reasons for preferring one witness over another
4. › Whether failure to expressly state reasons for accepting evidence amounted to error of law
1. Appeal
2. › Adequacy of reasons
3. › Assessment of damages on global basis
4. › Whether trial judge's reasons for assessment of past and future economic loss were adequate

Quick Take

A trial judge's failure to expressly state reasons for preferring one witness's evidence over another does not render the reasons inadequate where the evidence does not materially conflict and the inference is appropriately clear from the reasons as a whole. Assessments of past and future economic loss that are incapable of precise proof may properly be made on a global basis without detailed calculations that would misrepresent the degree of precision attainable.