Insights Insights
  1. Worker or contractor? Consideration in the context of a multi-party relationship

    7 July 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    This Victorian Court of Appeal decision considers the application of the common law test for an employee in the context of a multi-party arrangement. In Issue Whether or not the Worker was an employee or contractor for EVS. The background The second...

  2. The Full Court confirms that a s81A referral does not require watertight evidence

    2 June 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    An employer disputed liability for a physical injury based on a medical opinion that was ambiguous on its face as to the nature and cause of a worker’s injury, an injury which clearly had some relationship to work. In Issue Whether, at s81A hearing...

  3. Security for Nurses - Is it necessary in the workplace?

    2 June 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    A nurse was successful in her claim against her employer for breaching its duty of care by failing to have in place a system whereby security officers could attend a mental health unit of a hospital to assist nurses in having safe access to patients....

  4. Mines worker denied damages for high-pressure injection injury

    2 June 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    On 1 June 2014, an underground electrician at Ulan West Coal Mine sustained a high-pressure injection injury whilst working in the vicinity of a Feeder Breaker machine. The worker was sub-contracted to the operator of the mine, who was the defendant in...

  5. Discrete Injury found to support OPT claim

    2 June 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    The injured worker brought an application for leave to start a court proceeding despite non-compliance with the pre-proceedings process under the Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) (WCRA).

  6. Employer fails to overturn decision awarding damages to employee injured when a gas detector unit alarm accidentally activated in an office setting

    2 June 2020 | Insurance & Health Law

    An employee suffered musculoskeletal injuries when he was startled by a gas detector unit which caused him to turn sharply and strain his neck and shoulder. In Issue The decision considers whether the employer was liable for musculoskeletal injuries...

Load More