Kendrick v Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd & Ors [2007] NSWSC 1288
Both Bluescope Steel and ASMS were liable—Bluescope as employer for failing to provide a safe system of work by not segregating large industrial vehicles and light vehicles, inadequately addressing known road hazards, and failing to implement recommended safety changes; ASMS (vicariously) for the driver’s failure to bring the dump truck to a halt despite awareness of a developing hazard, amounting to negligent driving under the circumstances. Plaintiff’s contributory negligence assessed at 20%. Damages apportioned in line with legislative requirements and cross-claims calculated accordingly. Substantial damages, including for care, loss of income, and fund management, ordered against both...
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Alan Kendrick by his tutor Erica Kendrick; First Defendant: Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd formerly known as BHP Steel (AIS) Pty Limited; Second Defendant: Australian Steel Mill Services Pty Ltd; Third Defendant: Cooks Constructions Pty Limited; Fourth Defendant: Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd; Seventh Cross Defendant: Webb Air Auto Electrics Pty Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 December 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Negligence Claim (personal Injuries) / Final Judgment After Trial
- Outcome
- Judgment for plaintiff against Bluescope Steel and ASMS with apportionment and orders for cross-claims. Damages and statutory repayments quantified. Question of costs reserved.
- Legal Topics
- Employer's Liability, Vicarious Liability, Damages Assessment, Apportionment of Liability, Contributory Negligence, Obvious Risk (civil Liability Act), Injury at Work, Safe System of Work
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alan Kendrick by his tutor Erica Kendrick
Plaintiff
Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd formerly known as BHP Steel (AIS) Pty Limited
First Defendant
Australian Steel Mill Services Pty Ltd
Second Defendant
Cooks Constructions Pty Limited
Third Defendant
Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd
Fourth Defendant
Webb Air Auto Electrics Pty Limited
Seventh Cross Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Negligence Claim (personal Injuries) / Final Judgment After Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Bluescope Steel was liable in negligence and/or as employer/occupier for plaintiff's quadriplegic injury after workplace motor vehicle accident
- 2 Whether ASMS (haulage contractor) was vicariously or directly liable for system failures and actions of truck driver
- 3 Appropriate apportionment of liability and damages including calculation under Workers Compensation legislation and Civil Liability Act
Ratio Decidendi
Both Bluescope Steel and ASMS were liable—Bluescope as employer for failing to provide a safe system of work by not segregating large industrial vehicles and light vehicles, inadequately addressing known road hazards, and failing to implement recommended safety changes; ASMS (vicariously) for the driver’s failure to bring the dump truck to a halt despite awareness of a developing hazard, amounting to negligent driving under the circumstances. Plaintiff’s contributory negligence assessed at 20%. Damages apportioned in line with legislative requirements and cross-claims calculated accordingly. Substantial damages, including for care, loss of income, and fund management, ordered against both...
Court Disposition
Judgment for plaintiff against Bluescope Steel and ASMS with apportionment and orders for cross-claims. Damages and statutory repayments quantified. Question of costs reserved.
Orders
- Judgment for plaintiff against Bluescope Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd in the sum of $16,487,731; plaintiff to repay Bluescope Steel the amount of $5,786,744 on account of its payment of out-of-pocket expenses and weekly compensation.
- Judgment for plaintiff against ASMS in the sum of $16,650,699.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment