WCRA: assault on licensed premises – employer/licensed premises liability

Baillie v Jackson [2015] QDC 31

The plaintiff was a former police officer working for a security provider to a licensed premises hosting a wedding. In the course of his duties when speaking to one of the wedding guests the plaintiff was assaulted by the guest.

Judge McGill found the assailant was not showing signs of intoxication to the extent it warranted being asked to leave or to be removed. Furthermore, there was no indication up to the point in time of the assault that the assailant would be aggressive.

His Honour followed Karanfilov v MSS Security Pty Ltd [2013] QSC 304 (employer’s duty) and Adeels Palace Pty Ltd v Moubarak (2009) 239 CLR 420 (licensed premises duty).

In applying Lusk v Sapwell [2011] QCA 59 His Honour found the plaintiff could not prove the employer breached its duty in not employing an additional security guard, because it would not have prevented the assault.

His Honour having made the finding that there was no indication of intoxication or aggression, meant the claim against the licensed premises necessarily failed as well.

David Cormack – Brisbane Barrister & Mediator

Related Posts

Recent Comments



    Discover more from David Cormack, Barrister

    Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

    Continue reading