What happened
On 17 February 2008 the helper held a branch near the pool at the householder's request. When he pulled a branch that had not been fully cut, it released and he fell backwards into the empty pool, suffering serious injury. This additional lopping had been an afterthought.
The issues
The appeal concerned the duty of an occupier who organised the activity and the significance of being able to stop the work. It also challenged the helper's 25% contributory share and a buffer for future earnings loss despite unchanged current earnings.
The court's decision
The appeal was dismissed with costs. The organiser's control of the work required reasonable care against the serious risk of a backward fall, and proceeding without reducing that risk was negligent. The 25% contributory reduction and future-loss buffer were upheld.
Understanding the figures
The historical AUD award of $251,448, already reduced by 25% for contributory negligence, was upheld. The challenged $70,000 future-loss buffer was one component of the trial assessment, not an additional payment on top of that judgment. Appeal costs were separate.
What this case shows
Organising work for one's own benefit can create obligations towards an unpaid family helper. Continued earnings with an accommodating employer do not rule out future loss where evidence shows a real disadvantage if other employment must be found.
Why another case may differ
This appeal concerned a 2008 accident and the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) as then applied. The confined space, empty pool, direction of the work and ability to defer it mattered together; it is not a rule imposing liability for every household-help injury. The buffer depended on this claimant's medical and employment evidence.
Applying it to your claim
Different facts, evidence or procedures, an appeal, or a change in the law may affect how this decision applies. This is general information, not a report of a case handled by Park & Co Lawyers.
Considering a second opinion? →