Schokman v CCIG Investments Pty Ltd
[2022] QCA 38 · Fraser and McMurdo and Mullins JJA
Mr Schokman worked at a resort on Daydream Island and was required, as a condition of his employment, to share staff accommodation with another employee. In the early hours of one morning in November 2016, his roommate — drunk and semi-conscious — urinated on his face while he slept, mistaking him for the toilet. The shock triggered a cataplectic attack and made Mr Schokman's previously controlled narcolepsy and cataplexy substantially worse, and also caused post-traumatic stress and an adjustment disorder. The trial judge found the roommate had been negligent but held the employer was not legally responsible. The Court of Appeal disagreed. Because the employer required both men to live in the same room as a term of their employment, the roommate's negligent act was sufficiently connected to his employment to make the employer vicariously liable. The Court entered judgment for Mr Schokman for $431,738.88, the quantum the trial judge had provisionally calculated.
Incident & injury
Plaintiff was asleep in shared staff accommodation when a co-employee, in a state of semi-consciousness caused by intoxication, urinated on his face, triggering a cataplectic attack and exacerbating pre-existing narcolepsy/cataplexy.
- Body regions
- Psychiatric, Other
- Diagnoses
- Exacerbation of narcolepsy and cataplexy, Post-traumatic stress disorder, Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood
- Incident date
- 7 November 2016
- Location
- Daydream Island Resort staff accommodation
Quick facts
- Date of judgment
- 18 March 2022
- Claim type
- WCRA Common Law
- Proceeding
- Appeal
- Plaintiff outcome
- Successful
- Plaintiff age at injury
- 25
- Occupation
- Resort employee (supervisor) Manager
- Liability
- Disputed
- Whole Person Impairment
- 15%
- Total damages
- $431,739
Outcome
Appeal allowed. The Court of Appeal held the employer vicariously liable for the negligent act of a co-employee committed in employer-provided shared staff accommodation, and entered judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $431,738.88 (the quantum provisionally assessed at trial).
Defendant
1 CCIG Investments Pty Ltd
Employer
- Apportionment
- 100%
- Judgment against this defendant
- $431,739
Key issues
Schokman v CCIG Investments Pty Ltd [2022] QCA 38
When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.