Event and Time
Event Description
- In the early hours of November 7, 2016, Aaron Schokman, an employee at a resort on Daydream Island, shared accommodation with another employee, Sean Hewett.
- An incident occurred where Hewett, allegedly in a state of intoxication, urinated on Schokman while he was asleep, leading to Schokman's serious medical conditions exacerbated by the incident.
Application and Claims
- Schokman sued his employer for damages based on two claims:
- Breach of the employer's duty of care. - Vicarious liability for Hewett's tortious act, asserting that Hewett’s act was performed in the course of employment.
Judicial Decisions
- The trial judge ruled in favor of the employer, stating that Hewett’s act, although tortious, was not performed in the course of his employment, leading to a judgment for the respondent.
- Schokman appealed against the finding regarding vicarious liability.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Appellant's Arguments (Schokman):
- Asserted that Hewett committed a tort against him. - Contended that the close proximity of their living situation created a significant nexus, justifying vicarious liability. - Alleged that the employer failed in its duty by not accommodating Hewett's supposed history of sleepwalking.
- Respondent's Arguments (Employer):
- Argued that Hewett’s act was not a consequence of his employment but a personal misjudgment due to intoxication. - Emphasized that there was insufficient evidence indicating that Hewett's conduct constituted negligence nor was Hewett aware of his actions.
- Evidence:
- Testimony regarding Hewett’s level of alcohol consumption. - Suggestions from Schokman that Hewett had a history of sleepwalking. - The trial judge's findings indicated that Hewett, although intoxicated, was not entirely unaware of his actions as he later demonstrated some awareness post-incident.