Kleeman v The Star Entertainment Group Limited & Anor

[2022] QCA 119 · Fraser JA (Sofronoff P and Mullins JA agreeing)

In plain language

The applicant represented himself in a claim for damages against the operators of Jupiters Hotel & Casino on the Gold Coast. He said a luggage trolley collided with him at the hotel entrance in November 2015, injuring his lower back, after the trolley's brake allegedly failed and it rolled down a slope. After giving evidence on the first day of trial, he stopped appearing, citing illness, and the trial judge dismissed his claim. He then applied to the Court of Appeal, more than two months late, for an extension of time to appeal so he could obtain a re-trial. The court refused. It found he had no satisfactory explanation for the delay and that his case could not succeed anyway: CCTV footage showed his companion, not a failed brake, caused the trolley to swing, and he had no expert medical evidence to prove the injury. His claim had also been contradicted by evidence he gave in an earlier case. The application was dismissed with costs.

Incident & injury

Luggage trolley swung and collided with the applicant at the hotel entrance while luggage was being loaded; applicant alleged the trolley brake failed and it rolled down a slope into him

Body regions
Lumbar spine
Diagnoses
Alleged permanent damage to spine and disc L5/S1
Incident date
15 November 2015
Location
Jupiters Hotel & Casino, Gold Coast

Quick facts

Date of judgment
5 July 2022
Proceeding
Appeal
Plaintiff outcome
Unsuccessful
Plaintiff age at injury
Not stated
Occupation
Carer for his de facto partner; not employed at the time of incident (previously chairman of a charity organisation) Community & Personal Service Worker
Liability
Disputed
Total damages
$0

Outcome

The self-represented applicant sought an extension of time to appeal the dismissal of his personal injury claim, which had been dismissed after he failed to appear on the second, third and fourth days of trial. The Court of Appeal found there was no adequate explanation for the two-month delay and, in any event, the CCTV footage contradicted his pleaded case (the trolley brake did not fail) and he had no expert evidence to prove injury. The application was dismissed with costs.

Defendants (2)

Joint and several liability. The plaintiff received a single recovery of $0 — not the sum of the amounts shown below. The figures listed against each defendant are the judgment amounts recorded in the order; the defendants are jointly and severally liable, so the plaintiff is paid once.

1 The Star Entertainment Group Limited

Alleged owner/operator

Judgment against this defendant
$0

2 The Star Entertainment Qld Limited

Occupier and Casino Licence Holder

Judgment against this defendant
$0

Key issues

📑 Cite this case (AGLC4)

Kleeman v The Star Entertainment Group Limited & Anor [2022] QCA 119

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