вторник, 5 марта 2019 г.

Австралия. Преподаватель должна была сама во время хождения по коридору следить, нет ли мусора


Она поскользнулась на виноградинке и серьезно повредила  ногу. Дело дошло до суда, а суд выяснил, что локальный акт школы предусматривает обязанность для преподавателей «identifying rubbish on school grounds and either picking it up themselves or directing students to do so» («обнаруживать мусор на школьном полу и поднимать его самостоятельно либо давать на то указание учащимся»).

Суд также пришел к выводу, что если бы для выполнения данной обязанности был нанят отдельный человек, то все равно указанное происшествие могло бы произойти.   

То есть, суд пришел к выводу, что школа сделала все возможное, что разумно могла предвидеть, и отказал преподавателю в иске.

Какие были предмет и основания иска, думаю, можно увидеть в судебном решении по делу, которое упомянуто в нижеприведенной публикации.


Portner Press
Workplace Bulletin
 
 

 
  • School NOT liable – Why this teacher’s injury claim was fruitless
  • Your questions answered: Is there a legal requirement to install fire alarms?
 

 
Editorial Team
Editorial Team
Tuesday 5 March, 2019
 
 
School NOT liable – Why this teacher’s injury claim was fruitless

In Deans v Maryborough Christian Education Foundation Ltd (2018), the Queensland District Court rejected a teacher’s claim that her employer breached its duty of care when she fractured her knee after slipping on a grape at work.
During a daily ‘fruit break’, the teacher walked from a classroom through a foyer area and slipped and fell on a grape, fracturing her left knee cap.
She commenced proceedings against her employer, claiming that it failed to uphold its duty of care to her as there was no system in place for cleaning the foyer following daily fruit breaks.
The employer argued that it did have a system in place for cleaning the foyer after a daily fruit break, by placing teachers, including the teacher who made the injury claim, in charge of identifying rubbish on school grounds and either picking it up themselves or directing students to do so.
Grounds staff were also employed at the school whom the teachers could call upon to attend to identified rubbish.
The Queensland District Court dismissed the teacher’s claim on the basis that the risk was not reasonably foreseeable, especially given that the daily fruit breaks had been taking place at the school for approximately five years without any incident, and that the employer had a system in place that was adequate to discharge its duty of care to its workers.
The Court further noted that even if the school had employed a person dedicated to inspecting and cleaning the foyer after the daily fruit breaks, it was highly unlikely that the grape would have been identified and picked up prior to the teacher slipping on it.
This case demonstrates the importance of having adequate systems in place to ensure the workplace is safe. If the Court had found that the employer did not have adequate systems in place, it could have been ordered to pay the worker around $500,000 in damages.
Could you be liable to a $500K injury claim?
Make sure you aren’t by finding out about the vital information in the following chapters of the Health & Safety Handbook:
H1 Hazard Identification
D4 Duties of Employers
D3 Duties of Managers
D1 Duties of Officers
W1 Workers’ Compensation
Learn more.

 


Shop now
 
 
Your questions answered:
Is there a legal requirement to install fire alarms?

Q
I am looking for some advice in relation to fire alarm systems. Can you please advise us if there is a legal requirement in South Australia to have a fire alarm system in place? If so, which piece of legislation governs this and is there guidance around how the system operates?


A
Section 71 of The Development Act 1993 (SA) sets out three fire safety ‘priorities’ which the Act sets to achieve and also prescribes that building owners must adhere to the fire safety objectives and performance criteria as set out in the Building Code of Australia: “Section 71- Fire Safety (16) Any action taken under this section should seek to achieve, in the following order of priority— (a) firstly, a reasonable standard of fire safety for the occupiers of the relevant building; (b) secondly, the minimal spread of fire and smoke; (c) thirdly, an acceptable fire-fighting environment; in accordance with the fire safety objectives and performance criteria of the Building Code of Australia.”
The Building Code of Australia provides the relevant standards for smoke alarms in residential and commercial buildings. As the standards vary according to different types of buildings, you should consult the Code to determine the legislative requirements that your building must adhere to. You could also contact the South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service at: www.mfs.sa.gov.au, or the South Australian Country Fire Service at: www.cfs.sa.gov.au to obtain further information.
Your very own health and safety legal consultants are here to help
Free, unlimited support is just one of the great benefits of subscribing to the Health & Safety Handbook.



 


 Contractor fined $70,000 after
open stairwell fall 
 Victorian forklift tragedy earns freight company $375,000 fine 
 Construction company fined $100,000 after worker sustains minor injuries 

Don’t let your business become the next headline.
Discover an easy way to keep your workplace safe and protect your business from
fines and prosecution

Click here to start a free trial


    Like what you see? Try our other free bulletins

Twice-weekly tips and useful advice to help ensure you're always up to date with workplace legislation. Click below for an immediate free subscription.
Sign up now
 
Practical advice that will help ensure you comply with all your CoR and road transport obligations. Click below for an immediate free subscription.
Sign up now