Our client was employed by a manufacturing company as a press operator. He was doing his job as instructed when he was crushed between moving parts of a machinery. During operation, the loader of the machinery automatically moved forward crushing our client against the aluminium extrusion press. He suffered multiple and severe injuries to his torso as a result.
Our client was only in his mid-20s at the time of the accident and now deals with a life changing injury that he must cope with on a daily basis. His prospects for pursuing a meaningful career of his choice have been diminished since his injury. His ability to enjoy all the hobbies he used to, such as motorbike riding, cycling and hiking have all been severely limited by his injury. His quality of life will never be the same and he will not be able to pursue a working life, as he had previously planned.
No doubt his injury was avoidable. In acting for him in a Workers Compensation Claim and a Work Injury Damages Claim, we at Gerard Malouf and Partners identified a number of highly unsafe work practices at our client’s place of employment, which contributed to his injury. The machine our client was working on was relatively new to the workplace and none of the employees knew the proper way to operate it. There was no user manual available to workers and it was uncertain whether the employer had retained a user manual in the first place. The employer itself had little knowledge of the machinery and therefore could not and did not provide its employees proper training on the safe use of the machine.
Moving on our client has demonstrated a creditable and positive attitude towards getting back to work and securing employment that is suitable for him, given the restrictions caused by his injuries. He now has secured regular work which he is enjoying and is making the most of his situation. His positive attitude is truly commendable. However, the insurer used this return to work, as an indicator that economic loss was limited.
At Gerard Malouf and Partners we did not accept that. Although he resumed employment following his injury, we were still able to establish that there was a real likelihood of significant future economic loss.
The insurer accepted our points of argument, which of course was supported by medical evidence and particularly an opinion by an occupational physician.
With that a resounding settlement was accomplished, ensuring an attractive compensation sum for our client. This is despite the fact he remained in full time employment.
The members at GMP lawyers acting for this individual had great empathy for him. This client typified what is quality in an individual. He was very young but remained courteous and determined despite the severity of his injuries. This claim represents one of the best possible outcomes that can be expected in a claim of this nature. Our client struck a balance between gaining suitable employment and getting very good compensation, which we hope will assist him in getting a head start in his young life despite the injury.