QLD Personal Injury Cases
Explore our personal injury case studies. All claim information and payout amounts are based on real life QLD Court Judgements.
Work Injury Payouts
$326,743 Construction Accident Payout
QLD Court Judgement: Symons v The Haggarty Group Pty Ltd
- Occupation: Roof Plumber
- Injury Type: Serious workplace back injury (L4/5 disc protrusion)
- Impairment Level: 20 to 25%
- Payout Amount: $326,743.95
Peter was employed by The Haggarty Group (the Defendant) as a roofing plumber. While working under the direction of a foreman, he (and another employee) were moving sheets of corrugated metal roofing across a building site using a scissor lift.
During transportation, the sheets moved and were about to fall onto the other employee. Peter reacted quickly and placed his body under the load, pushing it up with his shoulders. He began to feel pain in his back later that day and went on to suffer a serious back injury.
- The court found that the employer was negligent and breached their duty of care by failing to provide a safe system of work.
- The Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, as he was acting in accordance with instructions.
- The risk of injury was foreseeable and could reasonably have been avoided by having a crane on the worksite, rather than relying on manpower to move the metal sheets with a scissor lift.
$121,134 for Council Employee Injured at Work
QLD Court Judgement: Welkver v Gladstone City Council
- Occupation: Senior Pool Attendant
- Injury Type: Lumbar spine injury
- Impairment Level: Not stated
- Payout Amount: $121,134.34
Nakia was employed by the Gladstone City Council as a senior pool attendant at the public pool. While performing his duties, he suffered a back injury when manoeuvring a number of timing touchpads on a fixed wheel trolley.
The court was left to consider the severity of Mr Welker’s back injury and its consequences. It was determined that the Plaintiff’s work accident left him with ongoing symptoms in a previously symptom-free back, which materially affected his functional capacity.
The court noted his young age in making an award for damages, recognising that he had many working years ahead of him that would be impacted by his injury.
$618,979 for Back Injury at Work
QLD Court Judgement: Gaudry v Pacific Coal Pty Ltd
- Occupation: Boilermaker-welder
- Injury Type: Lumbo-sacral disc injury
- Impairment Level: Not stated
- Payout Amount: $618.979.13
David worked at the Meandu coal mine in the South Burnett as a boilermaker-welder. He suffered an injury to his lower back while he and another employee were putting a drag-line bucket shackle pin weighing 75kg onto a bench.
The court held that the employer breached its duty of care by requiring the task to be performed without a safe system of work, as the load was too heavy for two employees to safely lift and manoeuvre. It was reasonably foreseeable that such a task posed a risk of injury, and reasonable precautions – such as additional workers or mechanical assistance – were not taken.
The unsafe system of work caused his injury, and the employer was held liable in negligence.
$650,645 for Workers’ Back and Psychological Injuries
QLD Court Judgement: Perkins v Woolworths
- Occupation: Grocery/back dock assistant
- Injury Type: Right L4/5 disc protrusion requiring surgical discectomy and rhizolysis
Surgical scarring to the midline of the lumbar spine
Adjustment disorder with depressed mood - Impairment Level: Back injury – 13% whole person impairment
Psychiatric injury claim – 17% psychiatric impairment rating scale - Payout Amount: $650,645.38
Michael was employed by Woolworths (the Defendant) as a grocery/back dock assistant. His duties involved:
- Unloading pallets of product from trucks
- Using a walkie stacker
- Placing the pallets of product on the floor of the dock area
- Breaking products down for filling by replenishment staff and collecting
- And stacking empty pallets
The claimant alleged that he began to experience lower back pain, especially at night, and radiating leg pain as a result of unsafe manual handling practices at work, including the use of a steel lever in conjunction with the walkie stacker.
The court set out to determine whether his injuries were caused by using the walkie stacker and whether Woolworths was liable for an unsafe work environment.
It was held that Woolworths was negligent in permitting him to undertake tasks using the walkie stacker, which caused his back injury and radiating leg pain. The court awarded damages accordingly.