Hunter v Alliance Airlines Case Summary

Hunter v Alliance Airlines: What This Queensland Workplace Injury Case Means for Injured Workers

The Supreme Court of Queensland’s decision in Hunter v Alliance Airlines [2026] QSC 140 highlights the importance of task-specific training for workplace duties that carry a foreseeable risk of injury.

For injured workers, the case is an important reminder that a workplace injury claim in Queensland may involve more than proving an accident occurred. The court may also consider whether an employer met its duty of care, provided a safe system of work, and delivered adequate training for the specific task being performed.

Hunter v Alliance Airlines Case: Background to the Injury

The plaintiff, Ms Kirstie Hunter, had worked for Alliance Airlines as a flight attendant since 2012 and had been a cabin manager since 2013. She suffered a workplace injury on 15 April 2020 while working on a flight to Townsville. At the time she was approximately 28 years of age.

The injury occurred when she attempted to remove a cart from its tightly stowed position during a pre-flight security check. Due to the design of the swivelling wheels and the confined dimensions of the stowage unit, the cart became stuck when its wheels overlapped with those of another cart, requiring significant force to remove it.

Limited space in front of the stowage unit meant the plaintiff could not comfortably stand directly in front of the cart. Instead, she stood to one side and used a twisting and pulling motion to free it. In doing so, she exerted significant force and sustained a back injury.

The Manual Handling Injury and Its Lasting Impact

The plaintiff experienced immediate and severe lower back pain after removing the cart. She took time off work before beginning a return-to-work program in August 2020, completing office duties in the defendant’s engineering office until February 2021.

The court heard evidence from orthopaedic surgeon Dr Bruce Low, who considered that the plaintiff had sustained a lower back strain related to the facet joints or discs. Another orthopaedic surgeon, Dr Kate Campbell, diagnosed her with a musculoligamentous injury to the lumbar spine.

Both medical experts agreed that the plaintiff’s injury resulted from the twisting and pulling motion required to remove the cart on 15 April 2020. The injury significantly affected her daily life, making it difficult to sit or stand for extended periods. Even standing for as little as 10 to 15 minutes increased her pain.

After considering further evidence from occupational therapists engaged by both parties, the court determined that the plaintiff was capable of part-time sedentary work for only 15 to 20 hours per week.

The Common Law Workplace Injury Claim

The plaintiff argued that the defendant had failed to provide adequate training on how to safely remove the carts from the stowage unit. She also claimed the airline had failed to implement a safe system of work by not ensuring flight attendants were trained to apply force correctly when removing the carts. According to the plaintiff, this could have been addressed by expanding the criteria used in the defendant’s annual onboard performance reviews.

Hunter v Alliance Airlines is an example of a common law workplace injury claim, where an injured worker alleges that an employer’s negligence caused or materially contributed to their injury.

Key Findings From Hunter v Alliance Airlines

The court found that the design of the stowage unit meant flight attendants often had to stand to one side when removing the carts. Unless they had been specifically instructed otherwise, it was reasonable to expect they would instinctively pull the cart from this off-centre position rather than from directly in front of it. Pulling the cart in this way increased the risk of a back injury, particularly when significant force was needed to overcome resistance between the carts.

The court also found that the design of the swivelling wheels and the confined dimensions of the stowage unit made it reasonably foreseeable that significant force could be required to remove the carts. Importantly, the absence of previous injuries did not mean the risk was unforeseeable.

Employer Duty of Care: Why Task-Specific Training Matters

The court found that the plaintiff had not been trained to initiate movement of the cart while standing directly in front of it before moving to the side as it emerged from the stowage unit.

While there was generalised advice in the manual about maintaining proper posture when pulling a cart from its stowage unit, there was no specific advice on how to safely perform the task. This was despite removing carts from their stowed position being an easily identified and commonly performed task

While the court acknowledged that the defendant already had a training program in place and a system by which it checked the performance of its flight attendants, it held that the system failed to focus with greater precision on how the specific, commonly performed task of removing the carts should be performed.

The court noted that while the defendant’s manual gave specific advice on how some common tasks should be approached, such as lifting items in the cabin and serving passengers, it did not do so for the task of removing the carts. The court also found that the focus of the system of checks was on the performance of tasks in service of the needs of the passengers and the defendant, rather than on the flight attendants’ ergonomic welfare.

No Contributory Negligence by the Plaintiff

The court found that the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent because there was no evidence that the way she removed the cart from the stowage unit was contrary to any specific training or instruction provided by the employer.

This finding is significant because it demonstrates that, in cases involving employer liability for manual handling injuries in Queensland, the court may consider whether a worker received clear, task-specific training on how to safely perform the task.

Damages Awarded in Hunter v Alliance Airlines QSC 140

The plaintiff was awarded $602,068.02 in damages, comprising:

• General damages for pain and suffering
• Past and future economic loss
• Past and future loss of superannuation
• Special damages, including past expenses and future out-of-pocket costs

What Hunter v Alliance Airlines Means for Injured Workers

Hunter v Alliance Airlines is an important reminder that employers may need to do more than provide general workplace training, particularly where a task is common, foreseeable and carries a risk of injury. For injured workers, the decision highlights the importance of considering whether:

• The task was performed regularly as part of the role
• The risk of injury was reasonably foreseeable
• The employer provided task-specific training
• A safe system of work was in place
• The employer monitored how the task was performed

If you have suffered a workplace injury, particularly a manual handling injury, seeking legal advice early can help you understand your rights and determine whether you may have grounds for a common law workplace injury claim.

Contact Hall Payne Lawyers

A workplace injury can have a lasting impact on your health, finances and future. Understanding your legal rights as early as possible can make a significant difference to your recovery and your ability to access the compensation you may be entitled to.

Seeking legal advice promptly after a workplace injury helps ensure your injuries are properly documented, your entitlements are protected, and your claim is assessed appropriately.

At Hall Payne Lawyers, our experienced personal injury lawyers can guide you through the claims process, explain your legal options and help you pursue the compensation available to you.

Contact our Team

You can contact our team by phone or email to arrange a consultation at one of our offices or via videoconference.

Whether you need advice about a Queensland workplace injury, a workplace negligence claim or a WorkCover common law claim in Queensland, our experienced lawyers can explain your legal options and help you take the next step.