On this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Joe Kennedy cover a range of cases, including who is responsible when injuries occur during an open home, the High Court’s decision on whether an employer is responsible for conduct of a drunk employee, a division of liability in circumstances where a worker was injured when working from a height, and an analysis of ‘obvious risk’ provisions of the NSW Civil Liability Act. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Enter at your own risk? Slippery driveways at open home inspections – 00:44

Drunk bunk decision junked: High Court clarifies the scope of vicarious liability – 7:12

Beware the liability pitfalls of working from heights – 10:52

To warn or not to warn – 14:54

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

On this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Jemima McGrath discuss a selection of cases involving an unreliable witness, fraudulent representations to a life insurer and the duties which arise as a consequence of intoxicated patrons of licensed premises (including consequences for patrons who fail to ignore the taunts of fellow patrons). To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

When a witness is considered ‘most unreliable’ – 00:43

Insured’s misrepresentations to outgoing insurer live on for incoming insurer – 04:22

A drunk man walks into a bar… Is failing to evict him negligent or not? – 10:58

So, what are you pleading? – 14:26

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

On this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Flynn Harch discuss a selection of ‘hot off the press’ cases which include the consideration of what it means to ‘use’ a motor vehicle, a dual insurance fight and a successful denial of cover based on misrepresentations, non-disclosure and fraud. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

The ‘use’ of a vehicle isn’t confined to circumstances where the vehicle is being driven – 00:33

The intention of the parties is paramount when determining the scope of a liability exclusion clause – 4:30

Don’t get tripped up – the importance of carrying out inspections properly – 8:27

Insured’s dishonesty not taken lightly by the Supreme Court of NSW – 12:30

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

On this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Gigi Lynis discuss when a limitation begins to tick on a policy dispute, the importance of understanding the true nature of a claim when reviewing policy response, whether a traffic jam constitutes a ‘dangerous situation’, and what it means to gain an improper personal benefit in the context of a D&O policy. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Act quickly! How long do I have? – Property Damage Insurance Proceedings Statute of Limitations – 00:37

Insurers liable to indemnify real estate agent for defence costs – 2:45

Traffic jam due to earlier accident deemed a ‘dangerous situation’ – 9:34

Directors refrain from personal gain – 13:12

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Jemima McGrath consider what it means to take reasonable precautions under an insurance policy, the circumstances in which a court will rectify a policy to reflect the intentions of the parties (and the circumstances in which it won’t), and the assessment of damages in the long running saga of the Scenic Tours class action. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Statutory conditions and “reasonable precautions” in insurance policies – what’s the difference? – 0:49

Common intent – no policy rectification if you can’t prove it – 4:40

When danger invites rescue, is there contributory negligence? – 9:25

Tour operator in troubled waters – assessing damages for disappointed cruisers – 13:50

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Mitchell Lee cover two decisions highlighting the onerous obligations owed by persons and entities charged with managing the safety of others. In the interests of balance, they also discuss a decision out of the NSW District Court involving a win for the defendants. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Intent does not suffice, employers can’t roll the dice on inherent risks – 0:46

It’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye: school liable for misbehaving students injuries despite obvious risk – 4:18

Still glaringly obvious – no liability for cyclist collision with poorly lit barricade – 7:47

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, BN's Kingsley Grimshaw and Melanie Karibasic discuss a range of interesting cases including a recent Victorian Supreme Court decision which involved a motorbike stunt performer ignoring the warnings of a stunt clown. They also consider the case of an inebriated employee who urinated on a colleague, resulting in consequences for their employer (and others!). Finally, they summarise a significant win for insurers and conformity clauses in the context of yet another COVID-19 business interruption case. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Motorbike stunt performed voluntarily assumes risk after disregarding warning from stunt clown – 1:08

"Don't bunk drunk" - A drunken employee who urinated on a colleague with consequences for his employer – 4:14

Plaintiff fails to establish causation where hospital admits breach of duty caused delayed diagnosis of pancreatic cancer – 6:57

Conformity clauses do the heavy lifting for insurers – 15:52

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, BN's Kingsley Grimshaw and George Rafter discuss a recent Queensland Supreme Court decision that considered the foreseeability of risk of a psychiatric injury being sustained in the workplace, an unsuccessful personal injury claim which may have ramifications for the band INXS as well as two very important High Court decisions dealing with the curly question of when an employee is in fact an independent contractor (and vice versa!). To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

When does workplace stress amount to a psychiatric injury? – 0:45

It’s all in what’s written: High Court lays down the law for the contractor/employee dichotomy – 5:13

Bitter Tears for INXS Guitarist – 8:43

High Court decision regarding change of status from employee to independent contractor – 12:05

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, BN’s Kingsley Grimshaw and Simi Singh discuss why the authority responsible for providing ‘flood management services’ during the 2011 Brisbane floods was not entitled to cover under its general liability policy, an outback music festival organiser who was denied cover for over $3 million in lost revenue following a COVID related cancellation and a rejected voluntary assumption of risk defence. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

You can’t claim insurance if you lit the fire – 1:15

Liberty wins on “professional services” exclusion clause – 4:30

Volenti defence against a wife’s psychiatric injury claim – 8:26

Festival cancellation result in multi-million dollar loss – 12:17

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.

In this episode, we discuss the much anticipated second COVID-19 test case, a decision involving a truckie found personally liable for damage caused after using his phone whilst driving, a personal injury claim arising out of a falling banana tree, and some useful guidance from the bench about what to do and what not to do in the context of obtaining expert evidence. To read the full summary of these cases, head to bnlaw.com.au.

Second COVID-19 insurance test cases – 1:16

Truck driver found personally liable – 5:57

Banana worker’s damages reduced for contributory negligence – 9:51

Don’t let your expert evidence muddy the water! – 13:01

This episode was edited by Audio Advantage.