In the case of Eaton v Tricare (Country) Pty Ltd [2016] QCA 139 the Appellant, Ms Eaton, worked in an administrative role at the Respondent’s nursing home for 3 years. At the time of her resignation, she had developed a psychiatric injury, suffering from depression and anxiety. On the basis of evidence provided by two psychiatrists, it was accepted in the proceedings that the injury had arisen as a direct result of her employment, in particular, Ms Eaton’s “consistently excessive” workload and the bullying conduct of a fellow employee, Ms Harrison. Ms Eaton based her application on two main arguments – negligence and breach of the employment contract. In the first instance, while the trial judge found that Ms Eaton’s injuries were a result of her employment, he dismissed Ms Eaton’s application on the basis that the Respondent had no relevant duty of care in the circumstances. In the appeal proceedings, Ms Eaton argued that the trial judge had erred in His decision on account of misunderstanding the content of her case. His Honour misunderstood the case to be that Ms Harrison engaged in “intentional wrongdoing”, providing that the proper basis for Ms Eaton’s complaint should be that of the intentional tort committed by Ms Harrison and that there had been no duty owed by the respondent. The appellant in this matter was awarded damages in the amount of $435,583.98 for her employer’s failure to intervene where there was ongoing bullying and excessive workload – it was held that this amounted to a breach of the employers duty of care owed to the appellant. Employers can be held vicariously liable for the behaviour of their employees. Employers have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of employees from workplace bullying and harassment, and from other unreasonable employment conditions, such as a sustained excessive workload, where it might pose a risk to employee health and safety.
For more information regarding psychiatric injury sustained from employment please view here.
Ask a Question