Kortegast v Williamson & Anor [2002] NSWSC 1134

Kortegast v Williamson & Anor [2002] NSWSC 1134

The plaintiff's injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment because he was present at the work site with the implicit encouragement of his employer after work, and the risk leading to his injury was created by the work performed earlier. As such, the workers compensation insurer (first cross-defendant) is required to indemnify the employer for the plaintiff's claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Issue Determination / Judgment on Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Second and third cross-defendants discharged from proceedings; first cross-defendant (GIO) to indemnify and pay their costs.
Legal Topics
['arising Out of or in the Course of Employment' "worker's Compensation Indemnity" "employer's Liability" 'causation' 'insurance Coverage']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Issue Determination / Judgment on Preliminary Issue

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's injury arose out of or in the course of his employment under the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)" "Which insurer must indemnify the first defendant for the plaintiff's claim"]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment because he was present at the work site with the implicit encouragement of his employer after work, and the risk leading to his injury was created by the work performed earlier. As such, the workers compensation insurer (first cross-defendant) is required to indemnify the employer for the plaintiff's claim.

Court Disposition

Second and third cross-defendants discharged from proceedings; first cross-defendant (GIO) to indemnify and pay their costs.

Orders

  • ['The second and third cross-defendants are discharged from the proceedings.' 'The first cross-defendant is ordered to pay the costs of the second and third cross-defendants.']