(Re: McCullagh) Seltsam Pty Ltd v The State of Queensland [2003] NSWDDT 3

(Re: McCullagh) Seltsam Pty Ltd v The State of Queensland [2003] NSWDDT 3

It was impossible to determine the causative potency and culpability of each exposure on the evidence available; therefore, no contribution can be assessed against the State of Queensland and there must be a verdict for the cross-defendant.

Parties
Cross Claimant: Seltsam Pty Ltd; Cross Defendant: The State of Queensland
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Cross Claim / Judgment
Outcome
verdict for cross-defendant
Legal Topics
Mesothelioma, Asbestos Exposure, Cross Claims, Contribution Between Tortfeasors
Torts Employment Law Dust Diseases Mesothelioma Asbestos Exposure Cross Claims Contribution Between Tortfeasors

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seltsam Pty Ltd

Cross Claimant

The State of Queensland

Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Cross Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether between 1954 and 1960 an apprentice carpenter exposed to asbestos dust and fibre from asbestos cement sheeting was subjected to a foreseeable risk of injury
  2. 2 If so, what was the causative potency of each exposure and the culpability of each tortfeasor

Ratio Decidendi

It was impossible to determine the causative potency and culpability of each exposure on the evidence available; therefore, no contribution can be assessed against the State of Queensland and there must be a verdict for the cross-defendant.

Court Disposition

verdict for cross-defendant

Orders

  • There will be a verdict on the cross-claim for the cross-defendant.
  • The cross-claimant will pay cross-defendant's costs as agreed or assessed.