Log in or become a subscriber

This content requires HR Daily Premium membership. Log in below or sign up here.

HR consultant's 'very basic opinion' thrown out of court

A "very generalised HR person" had no basis to weigh in on whether an employee's psychological injury risks were foreseeable, a court has ruled in throwing out his "expert" report.

The Vemco Services bid manager had claimed damages for a psychiatric injury, alleging it arose from being overworked and bullied.

In support of his claim the employee sought to rely on evidence from a principal consultant at HR Experts, but the employer objected, noting his opinion on the employee's workload was "not based on any field of specialised knowledge" and lacked necessary information about the role.

The Victorian County Court heard the HR consultant said if the employee worked 60-to-80 hours per week as he claimed, that was not reasonable, as it "essentially required [him] to act in the stead of two employees"...

Log in or become a subscriber
Subscriber login

Having trouble using your subscription? Contact us for help or check our FAQ page here for answers to commonly asked questions.

HR Daily Premium membership

Sign up now for all the benefits of HR Daily Premium membership.

Join here to stay informed

HR Daily Premium members are Australia's best-informed HR leaders and practitioners when it comes to HR news, thought leadership, legal compliance and emerging trends. Unlock premium membership to receive:

Full access to our news library Breaking news updates each day Complimentary passes to all webinars Webcasts streaming on demand Q&A sessions on hot topics And much more