What happened
The plaintiff worked a night shift in Bankstown Hospital’s eight-bed emergency short-stay unit. A patient with dementia, confusion and a known history of violence had been allocated a special nurse, but that nurse arrived late and was then redeployed while the other rostered nurse took a break, leaving the plaintiff alone. She documented the patient’s agitation and sought help, but he soon grabbed her hair and repeatedly struck her head against the wall and floor; pressing the duress alarm did not bring an immediate response.
The issues
The liability issue was whether the assault was an unforeseeable eruption or the result of a system that withdrew supervision and security already considered necessary for a high-risk patient. Quantum was confined by the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW) to past and future economic loss, superannuation and the Fox v Wood tax component, requiring assessment of the plaintiff’s intended nursing career and continuing incapacity for work.
The court's decision
The Court found that the risk was known from admission, reflected in the decision to allocate special supervision, and that staffing, security and the duress system failed despite the plaintiff’s requests for help. It found breach, causation and no contributory negligence, accepted the evidence that she would have progressed to registered nursing and nurse education, and accepted that she would not return to the workforce. The judgment did not enter a specific dollar amount, instead granting liberty for short minutes reflecting the mathematically agreed damages.
What this case shows
The case links patient-specific risk assessments and contemporaneous staffing records directly to the employer’s obligation to maintain a safe hospital system of work. It also warns against treating isolated social-media images or brief video as proof of exaggerated psychiatric disability without expert interpretation and proper attention to cultural context.
Why another case may differ
The result depended on the combined facts of a known violent history, an assessed need for special supervision, simultaneous nursing absences, missing security and an ineffective alarm response. Although the Court accepted the plaintiff’s methodology, the orders did not state a final sum, so the schedule’s $2,130,462 total or $1,795,234 after the stated workers-compensation deduction must not be presented as the entered judgment or net receipt.
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? →