Greenall v Amaca Pty Ltd

[2024] QCA 132 · Fraser AJA (Morrison JA and Kelly J agreeing)

In plain language

Walter Greenall worked as a roof fixer for the company now known as Amaca in 1972 and inhaled asbestos fibres, which decades later caused malignant mesothelioma. He was diagnosed in 2021, received workers' compensation of about $384,000, started a claim for damages, and died in 2022. After his death, his estate's representative tried to claim damages on behalf of Mr Greenall's widow for the loss of domestic services he would have provided to her. The legal question was whether Queensland's workers' compensation legislation stopped the widow from making this claim, because she was not financially dependent on her late husband's earnings when he died. The trial judge struck out that part of the claim, and the Court of Appeal agreed. The court held that the legislation only allows a worker or a dependant to claim, and the widow did not meet the legal definition of a dependant, so her claim could not proceed. The appeal was dismissed.

Incident & injury

Inhalation of asbestos fibres during employment as a roof fixer in 1972, resulting in mesothelioma diagnosed in 2021 and death in 2022

Diagnoses
Malignant mesothelioma
Incident date
1 January 1972
Location
Queensland

Quick facts

Date of judgment
26 July 2024
Proceeding
Appeal
Plaintiff outcome
Unsuccessful
Plaintiff age at injury
Not stated
Occupation
Roof fixer Technician / Trade Worker

Outcome

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that s 237(1) and s 237(5) of the WCRA abolished the right of the legal personal representative to bring a wrongful death claim for the benefit of the deceased worker's widow, where she was not a 'dependant' (not dependent on the worker's earnings) as defined in s 27. The strike-out of those parts of the claim was upheld.

Key issues

📑 Cite this case (AGLC4)

Greenall v Amaca Pty Ltd [2024] QCA 132

When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.

← Back to the case archive