Ibrahimi v Commonwealth of Australia [2018] NSWCA...
On 19 December 2018 the Court of Appeal, comprised of Meagher JA,...
News & Blog
Stay up-to-date with interesting perspectives from the team at McCabe Curwood.
The edge that separates what is ‘obvious’ from what is ‘significant’
If a defect is deemed obvious, does it also mean that it was 'not insignificant' so as to warrant remedial action on the defendant's part? Does the history surrounding the defect play a role in determining whether remedial action ought to have been taken? The Court of Appeal has revisited these issues in the following case. Judgment Date: 18 December 2018Citation: Bruce v Apex Software Pty Limited t/as Lark Ellen Aged Care [2018] NSWCA...
Battery, intention and personal injury – Fede v...
On 8 September 2014, the applicant police officer Sergeant Fede, came...
“All or nothing at all” – Vostek...
If a Worker with Highest Needs is able to earn a substantial amount...
Damages for misfeasance in public office: Nyoni v...
The tort of misfeasance in public office (misfeasance) is not commonly...
One injury, but two events – how does a Medical...
When a Plaintiff's injury is exacerbated by an unrelated event to that...
Who bears the onus to establish whether the...
When alleging a false and misleading statement within the meaning of...
Eileen Warren v Bunnings Group Limited [2018]...
Ms Warren alleged that on 27 December 2015 she slipped and fell on...
(Im)permanent impairment: The consequence of time
A worker received lump sum compensation in respect of 6% Whole Person...
Imperfect does not always equate to negligent: the...
A customer slipped on a wet patch in the common area of a shopping...