← All Authorities
Australia duty of carenon delegable duties

Baiada Poultry Pty Ltd v The Queen

(2012) 246 CLR 92
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2012
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Under Australian OHS legislation, 'employer' encompasses a principal who engages independent contractors, extending the duty of care to those contractors' employees.

Key Principle

OHS; 'employer' includes principal who engages independent contractor workers; duty of care extends to contractor's employees

Area of Law

employment

Related Cases

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Personnel Contracting Pty Ltd (2022) 275 CLR 165

Employee/independent contractor characterisation is determined by the legal rights and obligations in the written contract, not the totality of the relationship.

ZG Operations Australia Pty Ltd v Jamsek (2022) 275 CLR 215

HCA confirmed that employee/contractor distinction is determined by contractual terms alone, rejecting the multi-factorial totality-of-relationship test.

WorkPac Pty Ltd v Rossato (2021) 271 CLR 456

A casual employee's status is determined by the contractual terms at engagement; regularity of work pattern does not transform casual employment into permanent employment.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Baiada Poultry Pty Ltd v The Queen and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Baiada Poultry Pty Ltd v The Q...