Check a Queensland failure-to-warn allegation against obvious risk
MaintainedLast reviewed
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- From the failure-to-warn allegation and the risk description, build a table against Civil Liability Act ss 13 and 15. Record whether the risk is said to be obvious, and whether the plaintiff requested advice, a written law required a warning, or the defendant is a professional other than a doctor. Do not decide whether a duty to warn was owed.
- What the lawyer must review
- Decide whether s 15 applies and whether any s 15(2) exception is made out.
- A doctor is outside the professional exception. The note to s 15 points to s 21.
- Section 13(5): a maintenance failure is not an obvious risk unless that failure itself is obvious.
- The lawyer writes any pleading or advice.
Rules that apply
The document starts from the task name. Change it if this piece of work is different.
The work product
Forum. Queensland claim to which Civil Liability Act 2003 chapter 2 applies
Produce. An obvious-risk table for the lawyer's advice or pleading check.
Have ready. The failure-to-warn allegation; Description of the risk and the circumstances; Whether the defendant is a doctor or another professional; Any request for advice, or any written law said to require a warning.
Example of the limit. Illustrative example: The allegation is that no sign warned of a wet floor. The table records the risk and leaves obviousness undecided. It does not delete the allegation.
Stop and hand it back when
- Section 5 may exclude the Act.
- The defendant is a doctor and s 21 has not been read.
Sources for this task were checked on 2026-10-23.
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | From the failure-to-warn allegation and the risk description, build a table against Civil Liability Act ss 13 and 15. Record whether the risk is said to be obvious, and whether the plaintiff requested advice, a written law required a warning, or the defendant is a professional other than a doctor. Do not decide whether a duty to warn was owed. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- State the risk in the words of the allegation.
- Apply the s 13 features: patent or common knowledge, low probability, and a risk that is not prominent.
- Check each s 15(2) exception separately, and do not treat s 15(2) as creating a presumption of a duty.
- If the harm is a work injury or a dust-related condition, check s 5 before using these sections.
Sources
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 13 · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 15 · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 14 · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 16 · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) s 5 · 2026-10-23
Section 16 is a different rule: no liability for the materialisation of an inherent risk, and it does not exclude a duty to warn.
Section 14 is a presumption of awareness where voluntary assumption of risk is pleaded. It is not itself the failure-to-warn limit.
If the product is used in a Supreme Court submission, Practice Direction 5 of 2025 requires the named practitioner to verify every reference. District Court Practice Direction 12 of 2025 is the matching direction opened for that court.