<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="WordPress/2.9.2" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title></title>
	<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au</link>
	<description>David Cormack, Barrister</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 06:25:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>Queensland first: Mining employee sentenced to imprisonment for breach of safety and health laws</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Sparke Helmore
In a Queensland first, a metalifferous mine worker has been sentenced to eight months imprisonment for failure to comply with his safety obligations under mining occupational health and safety laws, which resulted in the death of a fellow employee.

Background information
Prosecution
Training and experience
Decision
Key messages for employers

Read more of the article by Matthew Smith, Partner of [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/queensland-first-mining-employee-sentenced-to-imprisonment-for-breach-of-safety-and-health-laws/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Cth OHS Penalty Principles – Linfox fine $150,000</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Comcare v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 004 718 647) [2010] FCA 793
As we move towards a national OHS scheme it is useful to refresh the penalty principles used in hearings of breaches flowing from injuries to employees. In this instance, the employee sustained severe and extensive crush injuries to his left arm and both [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/cth-ohs-penalty-principles-%e2%80%93-linfox-fine-150000/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Duty of litigation practitioners to prepare for hearings and costs restrictions from Legal Aid</title>
		<description><![CDATA[ Re: N (a solicitor) [2010] QSC 267
CATCHWORDS:
Profession and trades – Lawyers – Duties and liabilities – Duties to court – Generally – Duty to ensure matters are dealt with expeditiously – Criminal matter
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 418
Ashmore v Corporation of Lloyd’s [1992] 1 WLR 446, cited
Fryberg J
In a professional conduct decision which flowed [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/duty-of-litigation-practitioners-to-prepare-for-hearings-and-costs-restrictions-from-legal-aid/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>MVA &#8211; apportionment 75/25% against the plaintiff &amp; credibility problems &#8211; $11,449.47</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Holland v Kachel &#38; QBE Insurance (Aust) Ltd [2010] QDC 287
CATCHWORDS:
DAMAGES – NEGLIGENCE &#8211; PERSONAL INJURY –
motor vehicle accident – application of s.146 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management – Road Rules) Regulation &#8211; whether the collision occurred on a ‘road’ or a ‘road related area’ – application of s.74 of the Transport Operations [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/mva-apportionment-7525-against-the-plaintiff-credibility-of-problems-11449-47/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>“Not insignificant” risk and reliance on Australian Standards in a domestic setting</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Shaw v Thomas [2010] NSWCA 169
 
The plaintiff was aged 10 when he jumped down from a bunk bed, whilst at a friend’s house for a sleepover and sustained severe head injuries. The learned primary judge found there had been a breach of duty of care relying heavily on the Australian Standard AS4220:1994 (guard rail and ladder) for bunk [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/%e2%80%9cnot-insignificant%e2%80%9d-risk-and-reliance-on-australian-standards-in-a-domestic-setting/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>FWO prosecution – recalcitrant employer &#8211; $19,800 penalty v $ 14,865.31 unpaid wages</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Fair Work Ombudsman v Berges [2010] FMCA 526 (17 June 2010)
It is interesting to contrast this decision with Fair Work Ombudsman v Sanada Investments Pty Ltd [2010] FMCA 401 (9 June 2010).
I refer to my earlier posting in relation the Sanada (“Sushi Train”) decision. The aggregate unpaid wages etc amounted to $119,760.92, however, the total [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/fwo-prosecution-%e2%80%93-recalcitrant-employer-19800-penalty-v-14865-31-unpaid-wages/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Statutory duty &amp; breach – pure economic loss from refusal to grant a permit?</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Meshlawn P/L &#38; Anor v State of Qld &#38; Anor [2010] QCA 181 
Catchwords
STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – STATUTORY POWERS AND DUTIES – EXERCISE – LIABILITY – NEGLIGENCE – PARTICULAR CASES – where appellants owned and operated nightclubs at Surfers Paradise – where appellants had consistently been granted ‘extended hours permits’ under the Liquor [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/statutory-duty-breach-%e2%80%93-pure-economic-loss-from-refusal-to-grant-a-permit/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>No judgment &#8211; wrong jurisdiction</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Boulter v Crouch &#38; Anor [2010] QSC 258
It was admitted that the plaintiff would have been successful against her former solicitor for having failed to commence proceedings for her personal injuries.
Quantum was in dispute. The accident pre-dated the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), but nevertheless quantum was assessed at only $11,757.22.
Her Honour Atkinson J held [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/no-judgment-wrong-jurisdiction/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Is a dismissal a redundancy when the work is still being performed?</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Allens Arthur Robinson
In this issue: we look at whether a dismissal is a redundancy when the work is still being performed by others; where Fair Work Australia may still approve an agreement without good faith bargaining; Fair Work Australia having clarified the scope of flexibility terms; enterprise agreements should not cover positions an employer has [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/is-a-dismissal-a-redundancy-when-the-work-is-still-being-performed/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Slip and fall at a gym – Trade Practices Act and contractual waivers</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Kovacevic v Holland Park Holdings Pty Ltd [2010] QDC 279 
Catchwords
NEGLIGENCE – Dangerous premises – occupier’s liability – gymnasium used for exercise classes – whether floor unsafe – whether way classes conducted unsafe.
CONTRACT – Implied terms – Trade Practices Act – whether exclusion clauses effective – whether breach of implied warranties.
TRADE PRACTICES – Consumer protection [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.barristerdirect.com.au/slip-and-fall-at-a-gym-%e2%80%93-trade-practices-act-and-contractual-waivers/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
