Calls to improve amendments to NSW Workers Compensation Bill
Soft cheese product recall sparked by risk of Listeria contamination
“It wasn’t negligent driving. I had to swerve to avoid an unidentified vehicle” – which case won?
A car accident took place in Chatswood, NSW, on a dark and rainy day with poor visibility. One of the cars involved was a Nissan Skyline, occupied by the driver and his passenger, who worked together and had just left their place of work.
The driver lost control of the Skyline, crossed onto the wrong side of the road and came to a standstill. A four wheel drive vehicle travelling in the opposite direction was unable to stop and collided with the front passenger door of the Skyline.
The passenger was trapped in the car and sustained serious injury to his left leg. The driver of the four wheel drive was also injured.
Exactly what is employment law? Piecing together the employment law jigsaw puzzle
“By poaching our clients after he left, he breached the restraint clause in his employment contract” – which case won?
In 2003, a nineteen-year-old man began employment as a trainee accountant with a major accounting firm in Perth, under an employment contract that included a post-employment restraint clause.
Restraint of trade clauses are often included by employers to protect their client relationships should an employee leave and start up work in competition.
However, clauses of this nature are not always easy to enforce, because the law recognises that it is not in the public interest to hinder a person’s ability to earn a living or to restrict healthy competition between businesses.
The onus to prove that a particular restraint clause is “reasonably necessary” to protect “legitimate business interests” therefore rests with the employer.
“I developed an infection after surgery because the hospital was negligent.” Which case won?
A case in NSW centred on the question of whether a hospital was liable for a patient developing an infection after surgery.
On 7 June 2010, a woman attended a hospital for the repair of an incisional hernia that had developed at the site of her caesarean section wound, following the birth of her third child at the end of 2009.
The patient was admitted for surgery by a senior surgeon, but underwent the hernia repair at the hands of a junior surgeon, with the senior surgeon present to assist. The hernia was repaired and surgical mesh was placed over the hernia site.
“They had no right to rip off my building plans, that’s copyright infringement.” Which case won?
A case heard in Queensland revolved around alleged copyright infringement of building plans.
A couple owned a block of land in Port Douglas, Queensland, and set out to build an architecturally unique house on the land.
They engaged a building designer to assist and sent an email to the designer with their ideas for the house, which included proposed specifications, four pages of draft floor plans and two photographs of houses illustrating the architectural style the couple had in mind.
The building designer prepared detailed plans (“the building plans”) and the couple engaged a builder to undertake the construction. Sometime after the house was built, the couple listed the property for sale and sold it to a new owner.
“I signed that prenup under extreme duress, so it should be set aside.” Which case won?
A case that went all the way to the High Court revolved around the question of whether a binding financial agreement (prenup) was signed under duress.
A couple became acquainted on the internet via a website for potential brides. He was a wealthy property developer, an older man who had previously been married and who had three adult children from his first marriage. His family was in Australia, as were his assets, which were worth between $18-$24 million.
She was an Eastern European woman who was much younger than him, had been married and divorced, had no children and wanted to have children of her own. She had no assets, spoke little English and her family lived overseas. She had no connections or community in Australia.
The couple met overseas in person shortly after making contact via the website. He took her on an extended European holiday and met her family. Seven months after they met, the couple moved to Australia with the intention of getting married.
“Twenty pegs wouldn’t have done it”: questions posed by the Tasmanian jumping castle accident
“He was like a father to me, that’s why he left me his estate in an informal will.” Which case won?
A case in NSW revolved around the question of whether a note on a mobile phone should be admitted to probate as an informal will.
A 79-year-old man had an estate worth $13.6 million.
He had no surviving dependants and lived alone, but maintained close relationships with his older brother and with his best friend, who had become like a son to him.
For years, the man’s solicitor had “badgered” him to make a will, but he kept putting it off, saying he didn’t know what to do with his money.
On 4 August 2022, the man had a severe diabetic episode in the middle of the night and called an ambulance, as well as calling his best friend, who drove to the man’s house.
After the paramedics left at around 3:30am, the man’s friend told him he needed to “put in writing what his intentions were with his property” because “none of us know when we’re going to go.”
Exposure to toxic chemicals increases cancer risk for firefighters
Did the old man have the mental capacity to change his will? Which case won?
A case heard in the Supreme Court of NSW in 2017 concerned whether or not an old man had the mental capacity to change his will.
In 2011, the man signed a will which gave his estate to his three children equally. The will instructions were taken by his long-term solicitor. The man was aged 87 at the time.
In 2013 the man signed a new will, which gave his estate to his three children and his de facto spouse equally. Again, the will instructions were taken by his long-term solicitor. The man was aged 89 by this time.
Photography, privacy and copyright infringement
“I suffered catastrophic complications because a negligent neurosurgeon gave me bad advice.” Which case won?
The patient was a 73-year-old man who was happy, fit and active. In early 2011, he began to experience headaches and consulted his GP for treatment.
After performing various diagnostic investigations which were found to be inconclusive, the man’s GP referred him to a neurosurgeon.
The man consulted the neurosurgeon, who identified on a CT scan that the man had a benign brain tumour. The surgeon took the view that the tumour could be removed endoscopically, without the need to open up the patient’s skull. The surgeon said that this surgery would enable him to remove the tumour through the patient’s nose.
“I was only injured because of the company’s negligence.” Which case won?
A case in 2018 concerned the question of whether a contractor’s injuries were caused by negligence of the company where he worked.
A light vehicle mechanic employed by a service company was working as an independent contractor at a landscaping and garden supply company, servicing bulldozers, excavators, forklifts, trucks and wheel loaders across their 15 work sites.
In early 2007, the mechanic was directed to service a Volvo wheel loader that was owned and operated by the landscaping company. The machine had been damaged and the mechanic was unable to realign and fasten the bolts of the “bash plate” on one side. As a short-term solution, the bash plate was welded on, so that the loader could be put back into operation quickly.
Later in 2007 the mechanic was again directed to service the wheel loader. While he was attempting to remove the bash plate, which weighed approximately 200 kilograms, it fell onto the ground, crushing his right arm.
Did the police have a reasonable suspicion to conduct a strip search? Was the evidence inadmissible? Which case won?
A case in 2017 revolved around the question of whether the police had “reasonable suspicion” to conduct a strip search.
A man was riding a motorcycle along a road when he was stopped by police for not having his helmet strap done up. The man appeared to be nervous.
The police officer made enquiries and found out that the man had previous charges of drug possession and was on bail for manufacturing a prohibited drug. The police officer also observed “ice sores” on the man’s face.
Accordingly, the police officer formed the view that the motorcyclist might be in possession of drugs and decided to search him. In searching the man, the police officer conducted a frisk search and also put his hand inside the man’s jeans and into his genital area.
The man resisted and said: “You can’t do that”. He was then handcuffed and a strip search was performed. The strip search was conducted in public on the roadside in front of other officers.
A plastic bag containing methamphetamine was found in the man’s genital area.
Changes coming to NSW workers compensation for psychological injuries
“How can a head office make its franchisees sell pizza at a loss? Surely that’s unconscionable.” Which case won?
A case heard in the Federal Court in 2016 concerned an allegation by franchisees of a pizza chain of unconscionable conduct on the part of the franchisor.
In 2014, the franchisor of the Pizza Hut system in Australia devised a new “value strategy”, first to reduce the number of pizza ranges on offer from four to two; and secondly, to reduce the price of one range from $9.95 to $4.95 and the other from $11.95 to $8.50.
The strategy was devised in the wake of similar measures introduced by rival pizza chain Dominos, and on the back of several years of declining sales at Pizza Hut.
The franchisor undertook some testing of the value strategy in the ACT market, with promising results, and determined to implement the strategy Australia-wide.
Franchisees were required to adopt the strategy because the franchise agreements they had signed gave the franchisor the discretion to change the product range at their outlets and to set maximum prices.
