Obvious Risk: A Man Claims Compensation After Falling Down a Stairwell At a Sydney Ice Rink

Regardless of whether a person is clumsy or has a skewed view of their own skills there are times in life when accidents and injuries happen that could be, in a court of law, deemed a result of obvious risk. Take, for instance, the case of Moor v Liverpool Catholic Club, an ice skating rink in Sydney where Moor’s lawyer argued that he was entitled to compensation for his injuries.


Image sourced from Shutterstock

The basic facts of the questioned incident are that Moor was wearing a pair of ice skating boots as he was about to begin skating. As Moor began to descend the stairs down to the ice rink he lost his footing and fell, fracturing his right ankle. The question that was then raised was is falling an obvious or inherent risk that comes with walking down stairs in ice skating boots.

When it came to working out whether walking down those stairs in ice skating boots was an obvious risk it was brought to the court’s attention that there was no warning or suggestion present from the actual club that doing such a thing would be dangerous. It was furthered argued that the fall wasn’t an obvious risk because CCTV footage showed that Moor wasn’t acting in a way that would’ve lead to a fall or injury, i.e. he was carefully walking down the stairs.

It might seem like an obvious risk to someone else that walking down a flight of stairs in a pair of shoes that aren’t made for walking could easily end badly, but the key to Moor receiving compensation was that the club hadn’t provided any warning or information to suggest that such a practice was dangerous. In the end, Moor received over $100,000 in compensation.

For information on achieving a successful compensation claim, see Being Honest to Get the Best Results: What You Need to Know About Workers Compensation.


Sydney Workers May Not Receive Compensation for PTSD

With over a100,0000 peopleworking in Sydney a psychiatric injury can be the undoing for any worker, whether it’s from being involved in a harrowing robbery to working the front line as a police officer. The definition of worker’s compensation covers all types of injuries, not just the ones you can see like a broken leg, so obviously a matter like PTSD doesn’t need a lawyer to get a worker’s compensation claim fulfilled, does it?


Image sourced from Shutterstock

Joe Noonan is a former police officer suffering from PTSD after a series of very distressing incidents during the course of his time as a detective. He had a shotgun pointed at him in a situation where he genuinely feared for his life, he saw five deaths in one shift, he was shot at at close range, he was holding a colleague in his arms when they died of a gunshot to the head, along with many other situations that were either extremely distressing or that left him fearing for his life. If anyone’s entitled to compensation, it’d be Noonan, wouldn’t it?

Not so according to the County Court of Victoria and the Victorian WorkCover Authority. To receive compensation Noonan’s injuries would have to be classed as serious. Noonan argued that as a result of his job he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder as well as depression, anxiety, panic disorder and nervousness, which all sounds like quite a handful. The judge found that Noonan’s symptoms couldn’t be considered severe enough to receive compensation as they didn’t meet the requirements of the severe injury test. But why?

The reason was that Noonan was quite a high-functioning person. His life now is quite good and he’s quite productive, which is what really what undid his case, though there is evidence that his experiences do still affect his life but it still wasn’t enough for the judge. Noonan attends to appeal this decision.

If you’d like to read more about worker’s compensation, check out How Facebook Can Kill Your Worker’s Compensation Claim.

Compensation for Those Injured in Police Chases | BPC Law Blog

It’s hard to ignore the debate that arises every now and again in the media about police chases. There are advocates who believe that if police can’t engage in high-speed pursuits then the entire of Sydney will be swamped with criminals, while others argue that the chases are too dangerous. Whatever side of the fence you are on you can’t deny that if someone were to be injured in a police chase then they should be duly compensated. You don’t have to be a lawyer to figure that one out.


Image sourced from Shutterstock

At the start of this year Susan Delaney was awarded more than nine million dollars in compensation after a high-speed pursuit in 2006 left her with brain injuries that have severely affected her ability to function and have a normal life.

The chase lasted 40 kilometres after police noticed that a motorcyclist was a member of the outlaw motorcycle gang Odin’s. This motorcyclist was Delaney’s then-boyfriend and she was sitting on the back of the motorcycle.

The chase only came to an end when the motorcycle crashed, resulting in Delaney’s boyfriend dying.

The main reason it took so long for Delaney to receive compensation was the existence of arguments that suggested that she had in some way contributed to the accident. There were also arguments that asked why she didn’t get off the motorbike at some point before the fatal crash.

However, this also proved to be the crux of the defendant’s argument.

In court Delaney argued that the police hadn’t even realised she was on the motorbike at all during the chase. Perhaps if she’d somehow been taunting or egging on police than she would’ve contributed to the accident but as they were unaware of her presence it could be seen that Delaney was entirely passive in the matter.

Delaney’s entire focus was on staying alive – she hadn’t wanted to enter this chase but had been pulled along into it.

Susan Delaney’s case will prove to be a landmark case in the realm of police chases and contributory negligence. In any other sort of incident she’d simply be seen as being in the wrong place at the wrong time but the circumstances of the case made details and evidence murky to say the least.

If you’re interested in learning more about compensation cases see How Victims Compensation Could Work for You.