printer friendly version

RIGHT TO THE CORE

They are calling it The Apple Peel Appeal.

The case of the man who claimed $300 from Workcover after cutting his finger while peeling an apple on a meal break at CUB.

WorkCover and CUB spent $100,000 in legal fees appealing through the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal - and today the High Court refused to hear the case.

The worker wins. WorkCover and CUB lose. And I think the High Court is wrong.

Surely personal responsibility has to kick in somewhere. It was NOT a work-related injury. No way. And what next? If I am a smoker and I burn myself or burn a hole in my suit jacket can I now claim damages?

In my opinion in this case the magistrate who threw the case out in the first place got it right. The appeals courts got it wrong. And it is such a significant case that the High Court should have taken it on.

The worker who cut himself peeling an apple was Mario Hegedis. The law firm that successfully represented him was Slater and Gordon.

WorkCover has confirmed they covered the giant's brewery's legal costs because of the case's wide implications.

Paul Mulvany, from Slater and Gordon, said: " The Kennett Government in 1992 legislated to require a stronger connection between work and diseases such as heart attacks and psychological conditions.

" In their enthusiasm, their clumsily drafted legislation also eroded coverage for traumatic injuries suffered at work".

Fair enough. But cutting yourself on the finger while peeling an apple in a meal break is hardly a " traumatic injury" and it wasn't suffered at work.

Next you'll be able to sue for compo for heartburn in the canteen.

Friday, February 14, 2003

©Copyright Derryn Hinch 2002