S J Sanders Pty Ltd v Schmidt

[2012] QCA 358

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Employer and employee
5. › Safe system of work
6. › Failure to instruct on safe method of egress from prime mover cabin
7. › Whether employer obliged to devise, train, instruct and enforce safe method of exiting vehicle
1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Employer and employee
5. › Safe plant and equipment
6. › Purchase from reputable manufacturer
7. › Whether employer discharged obligation by purchasing equipment with recognised safety features
8. › Whether employer required to independently assess slippage capabilities of step configuration
1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Standard of care
4. › Employer and employee
5. › Risk assessment
6. › Whether employer required to undertake risk assessment of method of egress adopted by employees
1. Appeal
2. › General civil appeal
3. › Findings of fact
4. › Whether trial judge's findings supported by the evidence

Quick Take

An employer's obligation to provide safe plant and equipment is discharged where the employer purchases appropriate equipment from a reputable manufacturer and makes any inspection a reasonable employer would make; the employer is not required to independently assess the slippage capabilities of a step system on a prime mover purchased for its recognised safety features. However, the employer's separate duty to establish, maintain and enforce a safe system of work — including risk assessment, devising safe methods, training, instruction and enforcement — remains independently actionable even where the plant itself is not defective.