Join Kate and Greg as they regroup for a conversation in the bar to discuss the recent High Court decision in the Adam Elisha v Vision Australia case. This case was initially discussed in Episode 4, when the conversation was recorded from a LinkedIn live event Kate & Greg hosted in early 2024.
Join Kate and Greg as they regroup for a conversation in the bar to discuss the recent High Court decision in the Adam Elisha v Vision Australia case. This case was initially discussed in Episode 4, when the conversation was recorded from a LinkedIn live event Kate & Greg hosted in early 2024.
In this episode, Greg summarises the High Court’s decision and distils the legal technicalities into manageable bite sized chunks – extremely helpful for those who find legal technicalities hard to digest! A summary? The High Court concluded that Mr Elisha’s loss was not “too remote”, and the precise psychiatric injury he suffered did not need to have been foreseen at the time the contract was entered.
Greg provides listeners with legal takeaways and Kate shares her views as to how this decision challenges her quest for psychological injuries and their severity to be reduced in workplaces. But regardless, the discussion provides another perfect opportunity for the legal and psychological sides of risk management to be meaningfully discussed in a bar side chat.
Choose your drink, settle down and listen in to this special episode that not only concludes the Elisha v Vision Australia matter, but also brings Series 1 to a close….
Stay tuned for Series 2!
- Discussion of the High Court summary and the possible future impacts for employers
- What does this mean for psychosocial risk management, and does it change the approach?
Connect with us:
Resources:
Follow Judgemental: A psychologist and a lawyer walk into a bar