Stacks Law Firm is a leading Australian legal service provider with more than 250 people operating locally in many Australian communities.
We are committed to supporting the legal needs of everyday Australians and businesses across every stage of life.
A light vehicle mechanic employed by a service company was
working as an independent contractor for a landscaping and garden
supply company to service bulldozers, excavators, forklifts, trucks
and wheel loaders across their 15 work sites.
In early 2007, the mechanic was directed to service a Volvo
wheel loader that was owned and operated by the landscaping
company. The machine had been damaged and the mechanic was unable
to realign and fasten the bolts of the "bash plate" on
one side. As a short-term solution, the bash plate was welded on so
that the loader could be quickly put back into operation.
Later in 2007 the mechanic was again directed to service the
wheel loader. While he was attempting to remove the bash plate,
which weighed approximately 200 kilograms, it fell onto the ground,
crushing his right arm.
Mechanic brings action in negligence against company
The mechanic brought an action in negligence against the
landscaping company, alleging amongst other things that it had
failed to provide a safe place of work and permitted him to work on
a loader which it knew to be defective.
The landscaping company brought a cross claim against the
service company that employed the mechanic for breach of contract,
indemnity and/or contribution.
It was for the court to determine whether the mechanic was
entitled to compensation for his injuries and, if so, who should
pay.
case a - The case for the mechanic
case b - The case for the landscaping company
The people who supervised my work at the landscaping company
regularly put enormous pressure on me to complete work within an
unrealistic time frame, using inadequate tools, materials in poor
condition and insufficient assistance.
When I came to service the loader the second time, I was not
aware that the bash plate had not been fully repaired.
The landscaping company permitted me to work on a loader that
it knew to be defective and it failed to provide me with the
instructions and resources to complete the work safely having
regard to that defect.
I was not to blame for the accident and I should be compensated
fully for the serious injuries, loss and damage that I have
sustained because of the accident.
It was not our job to supervise or direct the mechanic in any
way and we did not provide instructions on the performance of his
work.
No-one working for our company is a qualified mechanic; that is
precisely why we engaged a separate company with expertise in this
area to perform that work.
It was the responsibility of the mechanic and the service
company that employed him to ensure that adequate resources and
equipment were available to complete the jobs at hand safely.
As a company we were and are committed to eliminating unsafe
work practices and we have written evidence to support this. All
yard managers and equipment mechanics were advised in writing that
the penalty for unsafe work practices is instant dismissal.
So, which case won?
Cast your judgment below to find out
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.