The following facts were uncontentious:

• from about 5 October 2017, the Plaintiff Stewart Boyd lived at 328 Biddaddabba Creek Road, Biddaddabba, Queensland (“the property”);
• Businessman Tony Govesis owned and occasionally visited the property, where he had exclusive use of part of the main residence;
• Des Trindall, a struck off securities advisor, lived at the property and occupied the balance of the main residence;
• Mr Boyd, Trindall and Govesis each owned horses;
• Govesis’ horses were depastured at the property;
• a website advertised horse-training services at the property (“the website”);
• the website listed the names of Trindall and Govesis, and their contact telephone numbers;
• on 3 November 2017, at the property, Mr Boyd was kicked by a horse owned by Donna Koitka (“the incident”);
• following the incident, Govesis required Mr Boyd — who had previously lived rent-free at the property — to commence paying rent; and
• as a result of the incident, Mr Boyd suffered injuries and loss.

It was alleged that Trindall and Govesis were inter alia negligent for failing to provide a safe system of work or to provide appropriate equipment.

3 differing accounts

At the trial, three parties each gave substantially differing accounts as to what occurred leading up to the incident. In summary:

Mr Boyd’s evidence was that he was approached and encouraged to take up residence at the property, and to work horses there, by statements separately made to him by Trindall and Govesis that he could live rent free, he would not be required to make payments towards the utilities and he would receive an income of between $50,000 and $150,000.

Trindall’s evidence was that he merely acted as an intermediary between Mr Boyd and Govesis and he left the meeting of 14 October 2017 after some 30 minutes of “small talk”.

Govesis’ evidence was that he never spoke with Trindall about getting someone on the property to work with horses and he had no dealings with Mr Boyd prior to the incident, and only saw Mr Boyd in passing when he went to the property to mow the lawns.

Trindall’s credibility

Trindall gave evidence that Mr Boyd had offered him an aeroplane if he provided a statutory declaration saying that he was employed by Govesis. That evidence was retracted by Trindall when it became apparent that that statutory declaration was executed as a result of an order of the District Court, and the claim that Mr Boyd promised him an aeroplane had nothing to do with it.

Trindall’s evidence included another bizarre claim that Mr Boyd had demanded about $5,900 from him on Facebook. However, no copy of the Facebook message was produced, and Trindall admitted that he had been ordered by the District Court to pay the sum of $5,905.80, and that was the amount to which he was referring.

Trindall’s evidence concerning the website was equally troubling. He denied that the website had anything to do with him, and claimed that Mrs Trindall was proficient at designing and building websites, and in 2017 advertised and promoted their business relating to horse services. But he conceded that he was involved in promoting the website, he took videos for it and the website was used for a business being conducted at the property.

Govesis’s credibility

Govesis’s evidence about the number of times he had met Mr Boyd was contrary to his own statutory declaration which had claimed he had only met Boyd once in passing.

Govesis’s evidence was that he was happy to allow Mr Boyd to live at the property without paying rent until after the incident when he was no longer able to work horses. There was no evidence other than his own assertion that the Trindalls had been paying him less rent after Mr Boyd was injured. That was not accepted by Trindall, and no bank statements or records were produced that could have supported this claim.

Especially critical was the evidence of Govesis that Mr Boyd would have to pay rent after the incident — having been allowed rent-free accommodation before the incident — because he “needed to pay his way”.

Govesis, who was agitated in the course of his cross-examination on behalf of Mr Boyd, then decided to answer each question asked of him with “I don’t know”, sometimes even before the question was finished.

The unchallenged evidence

There was no evidence that Mr Trindall or Mr Govesis took any steps to mitigate the risk of Mr Boyd being kicked by a horse at the property. It is plain that they breached their duties of care because they made no effort to or pretence at discharging those obligations.

On the unchallenged evidence:

(a) there was a simple and practical way to mitigate the risk, by the provision of a horsewalker, crush or other barrier to protect a person working, breaking and training horses; and

(b) this precaution is one commonly taken by people involved in those activities.

There is not a jot or tittle of evidence to suggest that it was either impracticable, or economically unviable, to adopt a measure which could have saved Mr Boyd from serious injury.

• On the Plaintiff’s evidence, largely unchallenged and entirely uncontradicted:

(a) the provision and use of appropriate safety equipment, in the form of a horsewalker, crush or other barrier, would have prevented Mr Boyd’s injuries; and

(b) had such equipment been made available, Mr Boyd would have used it.

Full story:

Stewart Boyd scores stunning upset in District Court after horse kick