The height of insignificance9 August 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The NSW District Court held a 5 – 10mm footpath height differential posed an insignificant risk within the meaning of section 5B(1)(b) of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)
Prior complaints not sufficient to establish Council was aware of “particular risk”6 July 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
In the recent decision of Ricky Eddy v Goulburn Mulwaree Council and Golden Star Import & Export Pty Ltd  NSWDC 150, a public authority was afforded protection in respect of a claim brought by a pedestrian who fell on a temporary ramp on the road, despite receiving prior complaints about the...
Employer escapes responsibility after shearer’s cook falls on loose step on occupier’s premises21 May 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
The New South Wales District Court found the occupier of a premises wholly liable, while the employer was found to have discharged its duty of care to its employee by undertaking a reasonable inspection of the premises.
Federal and NSW governments strengthen the rights of historical child sexual abuse survivors14 April 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
Legislative changes at the Commonwealth and NSW level aim to bolster the rights of survivors of child sexual abuse. It is expected that the changes will improve the efficiency of the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse and provide a better footing for survivors in NSW to...
Conduct required to decline indemnity under a reasonable precautions clause clarified by the Victorian Supreme Court6 April 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
This case considered a dispute between an insurer and its insured regarding the insurer’s refusal to grant indemnity to the insured under a public liability policy. The court found clauses that require an insured to take reasonable precautions are not breached by actions that amount to negligence,...
The runaway van and the contractor6 April 2021 | Insurance & Health Law
A subcontracted delivery driver who was run over by his van was unsuccessful in his negligence claim against the principal contractor. Despite the principal contractor having supplied the van to the plaintiff and having provided some instructions to him as to its use, the court found that...