An employer who acquiesces in workers' refusal to use protective equipment and does not enforce its use has not 'properly instructed' employees to use the equipment for the purposes of s 305H(1)(b) of the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld). Where only a small number of items of protective equipment are available for a larger workforce and are kept elsewhere and used by other workers, the equipment has not been 'provided' to the injured worker for the purposes of s 305H(1)(b) or (c). Pre-existing conditions must be properly accounted for in assessing economic loss, and where unchallenged medical evidence establishes the probable effects of a pre-existing condition with reasonable precision, a trial judge cannot treat those effects as merely a 'matter of uncertainty'.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.