CIVIL — negligence — psychological injury — liability of employer for criminal actions of a third party
CIVIL — negligence — liability of employer to employee working in retail — employee injured as a consequence of customer aggression and violence — significant psychiatric injury
CIVIL — duty of care — reasonable foreseeability of harm to employee arising from conduct of customer
CIVIL — breach of duty of care — reasonable response to risk of injury — posting of static security guard at store
Quick Take
1An employer's non-delegable duty to provide a safe system of work extends to taking proactive measures — not merely reactive responses — to protect employees from foreseeable risks of customer violence in retail environments, particularly where incident data demonstrates a store is a statistical outlier with escalating aggression and an employee has reported feeling unsafe.
2Online portal-based training on managing customer aggression is wholly inadequate where an employee's health and safety may be put in jeopardy; competency-based training involving scenario exercises and demonstrated competence is required, and reliance on centre security with response times of 5–10 minutes is operationally insufficient where aggression can escalate to physical violence rapidly.
3Where a defendant contends a plaintiff retains residual earning capacity despite chronic PTSD, evidence that the plaintiff is exercising significant real-world responsibilities (such as managing a parent's affairs under power of attorney) may undermine expert opinions of total incapacity and support a finding of limited residual capacity.
