Australia: Scott Samways v WorkCover Queensland and De Luca Properties and Lynsha [2010] QSC 127

Insurance Update May 2010
Last Updated: 7 May 2010
Article by David Slatyer, Wendy Blacker and Ray Giblett

This single judge (Applegarth J) decision of the Queensland Supreme Court concerns the commonly encountered considerations of duty of care and liability of those working on a construction site, as well as the application of a contractual indemnity between the principal contractor and a subcontractor.

The plaintiff was injured on 6 December 2005 when he walked into the raised bucket of a bobcat. He was a concreter, employed by the first defendant. He had been instructed by his supervisor to locate and retrieve some conduit pipe on the ground. A bobcat was parked close to where the plaintiff and others were preparing the concrete slab for pouring. He did not notice the raised bucket of the bobcat and he walked into it, injuring his left shoulder.

He brought a claim against his employer (first defendant), the principal contractor (second defendant) and its subcontractor who owned and operated the bobcat (third defendant).

The bobcat had been left in that place by the subcontractor. The bucket was raised to 1.5m to enable the operator to fix a failed hydraulic hose. The operator returned the next morning with a replacement hose and fixed the excavator, but then neither lowered its bucket nor returned it to its usual parking place out of harm's way.

There was a contract between the principal contractor and the bobcat owner/operator, which included two particular relevant clauses. The first provided that where the subcontractor also provided a driver for the machine, as in this case, the driver was under the sole control of the hirer (i.e. the principal contractor) and regarded as the servant/agent of the hirer. Furthermore, the contract contained an indemnity which provided as follows:

"The hirer (i.e. the principal contractor) shall fully and completely indemnify the contractor in respect of all claims by any person or party whatsoever for injury to any person or persons and/or property caused by or in connection with or arising out of the use of the plant and in respect of all costs and charges in connection therewith whether arising under statute or common law."


The trial judge did not accept the plaintiff as an honest and credible witness. The plaintiff admitted providing inaccurate and misleading information to doctors who he saw for medico-legal purposes, in order to enhance his claim. Although the actual incident was not observed by persons on the site, the plaintiff immediately reported it and received treatment from his general practitioner on the same day. Whilst the judge did not accept the plaintiff's allegations about the precise circumstances of the incident, he did accept that the plaintiff struck his shoulder on the raised bucket of the bobcat.

The judge found that each of the plaintiff's employer, the principal contractor and the bobcat subcontractor, were liable in negligence to the plaintiff.


The subcontractor was vicariously liable for the negligence of the operator who left it parked in a position with its bucket raised that was unsafe on a worksite with workers in the area. The judge said that proper practice would be to park the machine in a designated place away from pedestrian traffic or at least to lower its bucket to the ground. The subcontractor gave evidence that "A bright red bobcat in the middle of the paddock is pretty hard to miss", but the judge noted that the bucket was not painted red, that it was not in the middle of a paddock and that the operator himself conceded that he would not ordinarily leave the bobcat in that position.

Principal contractor

The judge referred to the recent decision of the High Court in Leighton Contractors v Fox and noted that, in some circumstances, a principal comes under a duty to use reasonable care to ensure that a system of work for one or more independent contractors is safe. The judge found that the plaintiff's employer raised concern with the principal before the incident about the danger of the bobcat. The principal did not appreciate that the bobcat had been repaired at that it was able to be moved. The judge found that the principal should have directed the bobcat driver to move it to a safer location or direct that it be fenced off in the event of a delay in having it moved. The judge said that bright plastic barricading material could have been erected to isolate the bobcat and its bucket from work areas. The principal contractor's foreman accepted that if he had been on site on the morning of the incident and seen the bobcat in that position, he would have barricaded it.

Plaintiff's employer

The judge noted the employer's duty to be non-delegable, to take reasonable care to avoid foreseeable risk of injury. The employer's foreman appreciated the risk of the raised bucket of the bobcat parked in the vicinity of where his crew was working. He verbally warned the crew to avoid the bobcat, and he asked the principal contractor to move it but was told (wrongly) that it could not. The task assigned to the plaintiff of looking for conduit required him to focus his attention on the ground whilst walking in the vicinity of the bobcat, and carried the risk of injury despite the earlier warning. The court noted that the employer could have arranged for a simple plastic barricade supported by star pickets to surround the bobcat. Barricading material was available on site. The judge said that in circumstances where the principal contractor and the subcontractor had neglected to cause the source of the danger to be moved, the employer had an obligation to ensure that its workers were not unreasonably subjected to it. The employer should not have directed the workers to carry out tasks in the vicinity of the bobcat unless and until it was barricaded.

Statutory duty

The plaintiff had also pleaded a case against each defendant on the grounds of breach of statutory duty (Workplace Health and Safety Act). It would have been helpful and interesting to receive the Supreme Court's judgment in respect of the statutory duty and the potential liability of each of the defendants in the circumstances of this case. However, the judge said that the findings of negligence made it unnecessary to address the alleged breaches of statutory duty and a legal issue of whether such breach gives rise to a private, civil cause of action. This largely remains a moot point in Queensland.

Contributory negligence

The judge also found that the plaintiff was contributory negligent. He said it was not a failure born of "inadvertence, inattention or misjudgement" (McLean v Tedman) or where the plaintiff's inattention was "bred of familiarity and repetition" (

Sungravure v Meani

The judge accepted the evidence of engineer Mr McDougall, that the plaintiff might not reasonably either detect the presence of the raised bucket or recall it at the critical time, particularly when working on a construction site and focussing on a task. However, the judge found that neither the task required of him nor regard to his own safety required the plaintiff to have his vision always fixed on the ground immediately in front of him, and that the exercise of reasonable care for his own safety required him to glance up from the ground regularly to avoid potential hazards. The failure to do so justified a reduction of his damages by 20% on account of contributory negligence.


The judge considered it just and equitable to apportion liability between the joint tortfeasors with 10% against the employer, 30% against the principal contractor and 60% against the subcontractor.

Contractual indemnity

The judge referred to the usual principles of interpreting such a clause. He noted there is a line of authority to construe an indemnity clause on the assumption that it is inherently improbable that one party would contract to absolve the other party against claims based on the other party's negligence, and a competing view that at least one purpose for obtaining or seeking such an indemnity is to protect that party against liability for its own fault.

The judge looked at the particular words in the indemnity clause here and construed the clause in the context of the contract as a whole. Whilst the clause did not specifically state that the indemnity included claims in respect of the subcontractor's own negligence, the judge found that this arises from the ordinary language of the clause. He found that the commercial and contractual context of the clause does not make it improbable that the subcontractor would seek to be indemnified against claims for damages caused by its own negligence. In this regard, the judge particularly noted that the bobcat was ultimately under the control of the principal contractor. He said "Lynsha (subcontractor) might be found liable to a third party by reason of the negligence of its employee, as occurred in this case. However, as between Lynsha and De Luca (principal), the employee was under the control of De Luca. In circumstances in which Lynsha ceded control over the operator and De Luca assumed that control, the clause should be construed according to its ordinary meaning to extend the claims for liability for personal injury in circumstances in which Lynsha is vicariously liable for the negligence of its employee". It was critical in the judge's decision that the driver of the bobcat was deemed and actually under the control of the principal contractor in this case.

The judge also concluded the meaning of the word "use" in the context of indemnity clause should not be restricted to the actual driving of the bobcat, but it is wide enough to include circumstances where the machine is utilised for some purpose, including whilst it is stationary at the worksite.

Therefore, the judge concluded that the subcontractor is entitled to an indemnity against the plaintiff's claim and in respect of any costs to the plaintiff and its own costs of defending the claim from the principal.


The judgement was permeated by the finding that the plaintiff was an unreliable historian who provided misleading and inaccurate evidence to doctors. The judge particularly noted that the plaintiff had more medico-legal appointments than treatment appointments. The judge considered that the opinions of the plaintiff's medico-legal experts (psychiatrist, neurologist, orthopaedic surgeon, and occupational physician) were flawed because of the plaintiff's misleading presentation. The judge said; "Having regard to the medical evidence concerning the plaintiff's left shoulder injury and the need to discount medical opinions that were based upon an unreliable or inaccurate history given by the plaintiff, I conclude that the plaintiff suffered a relatively minor soft tissue injury to his left shoulder ".

The plaintiff's damages were assessed in the grand total sum of $26,007. In particular, no allowance was made for future economic loss on the basis of the findings that the left shoulder injury largely resolved within 2 years, the plaintiff was able to return to work as a concreter and the judge was not persuaded that the injury and any consequential adjustment disorder impaired the claimant's future earning capacity.


It would seem to be a Pyrrhic victory for the plaintiff given the meagre damages awarded. It is a good example of a case where the plaintiff's credibility and unreliability will generally taint the case.

On a sound note for defendants, the case indicates that not every plaintiff will prove an entitlement to an award for an impairment of their future earning capacity.

Whilst the nature of the duty of care owed by participants on a work site is settled law, an application of the law still depends greatly on the particular facts and circumstances of the case. The same can be said of construing a contractual indemnity clause.

"For more information, please contact:"


David Slatyer

t (07) 3231 1532


Simon Carter

t (07) 3114 0129



Ray Giblett

t (02) 9931 4833


Wendy Blacker

t (02) 9931 4922


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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.