Liability
Legal responsibility for the harm that gave rise to the claim.
What it means in practice.
Liability is the threshold question in any claim. If liability is admitted, negotiation moves to quantum; if disputed, the claim must establish it before damages are awarded.
Liability is legal responsibility for the injury. Before any damages are paid, the claimant has to prove the defendant owed a duty of care, breached it, and that the breach caused the harm. If liability fails, the amount of the loss does not matter.
Courts often assess damages even when they find no liability, in case an appeal court takes a different view. That produces judgments where the injury is valued and the claimant still receives nothing.
Liability can also be partial. A defendant can be liable but the claimant’s own fault can reduce the damages or, in some places, defeat the claim entirely.
How it works, step by step.
| Decision | What happened on liability | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Lockhart v Bartholomai (Qld 2025) | No liability: the dog owners had no reason to know their dog was dangerous. Damages would have been $105,185.49. | Lockhart v Bartholomai & Anor [2025] QDC 202 |
| Hoyes v Wellways (Qld 2025) | No liability for a psychiatric injury found to come from pre-existing conditions. Damages would have been $70,524.50. | Hoyes v Wellways Australia Limited [2025] QDC 125 |
| De Martin & Gasparini v Bartlett (NSW 2025) | A win of over $2.5 million overturned because the co-worker’s negligence was not proved. | De Martin & Gasparini v Bartlett [2025] NSWCA 56 |
| Filmalter v Swenson (Qld 2025) | No liability for a doctor who prescribed an antibiotic; judgment for the doctor. | Filmalter v Swenson [2025] QSC 32 |
| Coleman v. Soccer Association (Md. 2013) | The association was negligent, but the coach’s own contributory negligence barred recovery. | Coleman v. Soccer Association of Columbia (Md. 2013) |
| Singleton v Direct Personnel (Qld 2025) | Both the labour hire employer and the host business were liable. | Singleton v Direct Personnel Services [2025] QSC 259 |
A worked example.
Valued but not paid: Lockhart v Bartholomai (Qld 2025)
- Incident
- A 73 year old fell when a Labrador ran at him through an open gate, 8 July 2021
- Injuries
- Tibial plateau fracture, nerve damage with foot drop, depression
- General damages the court would have given
- $40,500
- Notional judgment
- $105,185.49
- Actual judgment
- For the defendants
The owners did not know, and had no reason to know, that the dog had a vicious or mischievous tendency. With no liability, the injuries were valued but nothing was paid.