Repetitive Tasks & Risk: Why This $225K Workplace Injury Claim Failed in Court

12 April 2026

What Happened in This Case?

A Business Development Manager injured her thumb while turning 2-litre soft drink bottles to “face up” labels in a customer’s fridge. She sued her employer for negligence, alleging it failed to provide a safe system of work for repetitive hand movements. A jury agreed and awarded her $225,000 for pain and suffering, but nothing for economic loss. However, in a rare occurrence in Australian law, the judge later overturned the jury’s verdict and entered judgment for the employer, ordering the worker to pay the employer’s costs.

Why Did the Judge Overturn the Jury?

The key issue was evidence. The worker argued that the employer should have had a different work system (for example, removing “facing up” from her duties or assigning her to a desk role).
The judge found that:

  1. The worker did not prove any clear, practical alternative system of work that the employer should have put in place before the injury;
  2. Documents and medical opinions about post-injury return-to-work arrangements did not show what a reasonable employer was required to do before the injury;
  3. There was no proper evidentiary basis to link any alleged failure in the system of work to the thumb injury.
  4. Because of this gap in evidence, the judge held there was no evidence on which a reasonable jury could find negligence, and the employer succeeded despite the original jury verdict.]

What Does This Mean for Employers?

This case is a reminder that even “small” or routine tasks – like turning bottles on a shelf – can become the subject of serious litigation, but also that:

  1. Courts expect clear evidence about what a safe system of work should look like; and
  2. A claim can fail if a worker cannot identify and prove a realistic alternative system that would have prevented the injury.

For employers, it underlines the value of good OHS documentation, solid training, and early legal advice when a claim is made.

Key Takeaways for Employers

  1. Treat repetitive and “low-risk” tasks seriously

    Even light items and small movements (like turning bottles) can create a cumulative risk of injury, particularly where tasks are frequent and repetitive.

    1. Keep your systems and paperwork in order
    2. Maintain job task analyses for relevant roles.
    3. Keep manual handling and ergonomics training records up to date.
    4. Ensure your risk assessments cover repetitive hand and wrist movements where relevant.
    5. Think ahead, not just after an incident! Don’t wait for an injury to review tasks that involve repetition, awkward postures or fine hand movements.
    6. Consider whether task rotation, breaks, use of both hands, or re-design of displays are reasonably practicable.
    7. Understand that RTW changes don’t prove past negligence
    8. Post-injury modified duties and return-to-work plans are important for rehabilitation, but they are usually seen as a response to an injury, not an admission that the original system was unsafe.
    9. Get advice early if a claim is made
      In a common-law claim, arguments about safe systems of work, counterfactuals, and causation are technical and evidence-heavy. Strategic advice at an early stage can significantly affect the outcome.

    How We Can Help

    We act for employers in employment, OHS and work injury matters, including claims involving:

    • Repetitive or awkward manual tasks;
    • Allegations of unsafe systems of work; and
    • Complex litigation where jury findings and post-trial applications may arise.
      We can help you:
    • Review and strengthen your OHS systems and documentation;
    • Prepare for and defend work injury and negligence claims; and
    • Develop a practical, defensible approach to repetitive and merchandising-type tasks in your business.

    If you’d like us to review your current systems or advise on a particular incident or claim, we’re here to assist.