caused by breach of duty on the part of the employer
› No failure to provide
Damages
› Assessment of Quantum
› Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act
› Determination as to whole person impairment
› Most current AMA Guides preferred
› Reliance on previous Guides does not invalidate assessment
› 6% whole person impairment appropriate in the circumstances
› contributory negligence included in assessment
› Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act s 18.
Martin v Moore [1999] NTSC 34; McLean v Tedman [1984] HCA 60; (1984) 155 CLR 306, cited
Quick Take
1A contractor who is akin to an employee is owed the same non-delegable duty of care to provide, maintain and enforce a safe system of work as a conventional employee, where sufficient proximity exists between the parties.
2Where the mechanism of injury described by a plaintiff is found to be physically improbable on expert biomechanical evidence, and the plaintiff's credibility is undermined by extensive surveillance footage contradicting claimed disability, the claim fails on causation and proof of injury.
3Under s 18 of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act (NT), the phrase 'from time to time' in the definition of 'prescribed guides' means the most current edition of the AMA Guides is likely to be preferred, but an assessment made using an earlier edition is not thereby invalid.
