• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

Hemmant's List Hemmant's List

0735053969
Menu
Menu
  • About
    • The story of Hemmant and Lord Atkin
    • How does the list work?
    • How does a barrister join the list?
    • The Clerk
    • Emerging Art Program
    • Equitable Briefing
    • Former List Members (Judicial Appointments)
  • Barristers
  • Mediators & Arbitrators
  • Mediation Centre
  • Areas of Practice
      • Administrative & Public Law
      • Alternative Dispute Resolution
      • Appellate
      • Civil Litigation
      • Commercial Law
      • Crime
      • Employment & Industrial Relations
      • Equity & Trusts
      • Estate Law
      • Family Law
      • Human rights law
      • Inquests & Inquiries
      • Intellectual property law
      • International law
      • Marine law
      • Medical Negligence
      • Native Title Law
      • Personal Injuries and Health Law
      • Property Law
      • Resources, Construction & Infrastructure Law
      • Taxation Law
  • NEWS

NEWS

State Not Protected from Vicarious Liability in State of Queensland v Roane-Spray [2017] QCA 245

October 23, 2017

Richard Douglas QC appeared before Fraser and Philippides JJA and Bowskill J for the appellant in this matter.

Mrs Roane-Spray had been injured when one end of the stretcher she was on collapsed while being lifted out of the ambulance by a paramedic.  She sued the appellant, as employer of the paramedic, for negligence in the District court and the appellant was found to be vicariously liable for the conduct of the paramedic.

The State had contended that it was entitled to the benefit of the immunity conferred upon certain entities performing duties to enhance public safety, in circumstances of emergency, by s 27 of the Civil Liability Act 2003. The primary judge found that the State was not a prescribed entity as required by s 27. The state appealed against that finding.

The prescribed entities are contained in schedule 2 to the Civil Liability Regulation 2003 and include the Queensland Ambulance Service established under the Ambulance Service Act 1991. The appellant argued that the Queensland Ambulance Service is an emanation of the Crown in right of the State of Queensland and therefore the reference in schedule 2 should be read as “Queensland Ambulance Service in right of the State”.

The court found that the Queensland Ambulance Service was an unincorporated body and did not represent the State.  The court observed that it is in the public interest to protect the entity, comprising the officers, from litigation and liability when performing services to enhance public safety.  However, there was no basis for reading s 27 as removing vicarious liability of the State as employer of the paramedic.

 

See judgment here: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCA/2017/245

Share
  • Linkedin
  • Facebook
  • Gmail

Contact the Clerk

Hemmant's List Centre Level 6 Santos Place 32 Turbot Street Brisbane QLD 4000
+61 7 3505 3969 admin@hemmantslist.com.au
Submit a Briefing Request   Online Briefing
LinkedIn

Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

© 2025 Hemmant's List
  • Facility Bookings
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap
ABN 87 612 554 551
Web Design by iCreate Advertising