Login or become a OHS Alert subscriber

Lack of foreseeability bars high-pressure injection claim

A worker suing his host employer after high-pressure fluid pierced his hand has unsuccessfully argued the company should have extended guarding on the relevant pipes and fittings. A court found these claims were retrospective.

You need to be logged in to read this article.

Subscribers log in here

Having trouble using your subscription? Contact us for help or check our FAQ page here for answers to commonly asked questions.

Non subscribers: Access OHS Alert by starting your subscription here.

Haven't seen OHS Alert before? For a 28-day free trial sign up here.

Go back to our homepage here.

Latest news
Stress amendments to trigger much litigation; and more Defective non-slip strip caused Nauru fall, bench confirms New laws target secondary psychological injuries, cancer Stop-harassment jurisdiction examined in "vile" case Safety inspections by self-driving vehicles to come out of high-spend enforceable undertaking
Jurisdiction
AustMap Tasmania Victoria South Australia New South Wales Australian Capital Territory Queensland the Northern Territitory Western Australia National / Commonwealth
OHS case studies
Q&A: Wellbeing program reduces stress and anxiety, and targets sedentary risks Food strategy combats brain fog in hazardous industry Boeing review reveals distrust of work safety reporting Four-day week reducing stress and absences at Medibank CMS improved WHS compliance, attracted WHS prize