Justifying her sentence, Ms Mottley described the potential for damage to a person’s reputation through social media postings as ‘incalculable’. She explained that the severity of the offence lies in the fact that the viewing and circulation of content placed online cannot be controlled. According to the Sun Herald, she said, “…once it goes on the worldwide web via Facebook it effectively means it is open to anyone who has some link in any way, however remotely.” The fact that people would be able to download the content and view or re-distribute it sometime in the future (even once removed from the offender’s profile) is also cause for concern.

Ms Mottley further explained that given the popularity of social media sites and their “limited (access) boundaries”, she felt that the sentence needed to serve as a deterrent, both to the offender and the community at large, from using these sites in a harmful way.

Executive Director of the cyberspace law and policy centre at the University of NSW, David Vaile told the Sun  Herald that offences of harassment and indecent publication  conducted online are generally not taken as seriously as ‘physical offences’. He suggested however that this case is ‘the tip of the iceberg’, of potential online offences and gave the following analogy:  ”he didn’t slash her tyres in an act of revenge, he slashed her reputation.”

In the wake of this case, Alec Christie, privacy expert at law firm DLA Piper also suggested that the federal government review of privacy law should include online media. The case has drawn attention to the fact that with new technologies have come new opportunities to commit both civil and criminal offences and the law needs to stay abreast of these changes so that people can be held accountable for their actions.

Tourist visas to Kazakhstan have increased tenfold since 2006 according to foreign Minister Yerzhan Kazykhanov. Why?  The comedy film “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan”. “Borat”, played by Sacha Baron Cohen was criticised by the government of Kazakhstan as being a risk to their national identity. The film was seen as sexist, racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic and was initially banned in Kazakhstan for its offensive portrayal of the state.  Nonetheless, according to a report in the Sunday Times, Kazykhanov told parliament this month, “I am grateful to Borat for helping attract tourists to Kazakhstan.”

In an unfortunate turn of events last month however, the ghost of Borat continues to haunt the people of Kazakhstan.  During an international shooting tournament in Kuwait, the Kazakhstani gold medallist was humiliated when the organisers of the event accidentally played the Borat version of Kazakhstan’s national anthem which included lines such as:

“…Kazakhstan’s prostitutes cleanest in the region…”

and

“…Kazakhstan number one exporter of potassium…”

See our Youtube link for the full anthem and lyrics.

According to an article in The Age, it is believed that four jet-ski riders were involved in the fatal crash. The article reports that the competitors collided after riding a sharp turn at speeds exceeding 100km/h.  Paramedics failed to resuscitate Scaturchio and he was pronounced dead at the scene.

The Courier Mail reported that according to Secretary of the Australian Jet Sport Boating Association, Mandy Brown, a full inquiry into the incident will be conducted by the sport in addition to Forensic Crash Unit and Water Police investigations already underway.

The Scaturchio family has been extensively involved in the sport of jet-ski riding. Joey’s father, Tony Scaturchio is the president of the Victorian Jet Sports Boating Association of which Joey had also been a member.  Mr Scaturchio and Joey’s younger brother had both also competed in the Nationals over the weekend prior to Joey’s death.

Mr Scaturchio is quoted in the Age as saying, “we do enter these events with the knowledge that motor sports are dangerous but … hoping that nothing does happen.” From a risk management point of view, there is a recognised level of inherent risk in on-water motor sports which participants generally choose to accept. The occurrence of a fatal accident can serve as a reality check, forcing participants like the Scaturchio’s to reconsider the extent of their tolerability of this risk. The frequency of incidents (if they become more common) can also increase the inherent risk.

Joey Scaturchio’s is one of a number of recent jet-ski accidents that have occurred across Australia resulting in a fatality or serious injury. Some of these incidents include:

• Earlier last month a 16 year old girl was rushed to Gold Coast Hospital with fractured ribs and lacerations to her head as a result of a jet-ski accident at Southport Broadwater

• In February this year a swimmer was hit by two men riding a jet ski at Port Melbourne Beach. He was placed on life support but died in hospital

• In Longford, Tasmania, last December, a woman’s right leg was torn apart by tow ropes after she fell off a jet ski

• A collision between two jet-ski riders in Brighton Le Sands last November left one man requiring an emergency tracheotomy to secure his airways after suffering severe head injuries

• In 2010 a man was killed on the Molongo River in Canberra when his jet-ski was hit by ski boat

Against the tennis school, the claim alleges that supervision provided for the lesson was inadequate and that the tennis school breached its duty of care by allowing the girls to stand too close together and hit more than one ball at a time. It also alleges that the tennis school was negligent in failing to provide the students with protective eyewear. The claim against Somerset College also alleges negligence.

The claim addressed to Julia Wright-Smith was received by her father who, according to the Herald Sun was “gobsmacked”.  In an interview with the Courier-Mail, he reportedly described the situation as “bizarre … beyond belief” and said “I couldn’t believe it when I opened this legal letter addressed to my 13-year-old daughter.”

The litigious culture that this incident represents could potentially threaten the continuation of sporting activities in schools as the risk of being sued is likely to deter schools from offering activities that may result in injuries. An article in the Herald Sun has suggested that this process is already underway, reporting that “several Queensland schools have already banned activities including tiggy, red rover and cartwheels because of injury fears”.

As compensation law expert Mark O’Connor states in an article in the Brisbane Times, it can be difficult to succeed in a negligence action in circumstances like Finley’s. Given that there are inherent risks involved in sports, the law presumes tacit acceptance on the part of sporting participants (or consenting parents/guardians) of certain risks of injury. Nevertheless, the attention this case has drawn to the potential exposure of schools to injury compensation claims raises the issue of whether this risk should be more tightly controlled and if so, how far schools should go.

On the flip side, concern has been expressed by the High Court, according to lawyer Bill Potts (quoted in the Herald Sun), that cases of this nature propagate a ‘culture of blame’ and that individuals ought to accept greater responsibility for their own actions. The injury suffered in this case was undeniably unfortunate but the public policy implications of this type of litigation beg the questions of whether a law suit was really the answer.

Kurrawa beach, located to the south of Surfer’s Paradise was endorsed by the Bligh government as the venue for the national surf life saving title (also known as ‘the Aussies’) until 2017. According to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), Andrew Short of the University of Sydney’s school of geosciences said that Kurrawa is ‘not especially dangerous’, comparing it to Manly of Bondi in terms of its hazard rating. Yet, Matthew Barclay is the third teenager to die at Kurrawa during the national titles. Teen ironman Saxon Bird and Kurrawa under-18 boat crew member Robert Gatenby both drowned there in 2010 and 1996 respectively.

According to the SMH, Chris Branson QC, who represented Saxon Bird’s family at the coronial inquest into his death, criticised Surf Life Saving Australia’s (SLSA) decision to hold the Aussies at Kurrawa. He was quoted in the SMH as saying that SLSA “has not learnt from previous deaths” and the reasons for continuing to hold the event at Kurrawa beach are ostensibly commercial”.

Surf Life Saving Australia’s CEO, Brett Williamson refuted this statement and drew on the research of Andrew Short from Sydney University to suggest that conditions at Kurrawa should not have been too unsafe to sustain this event last week. As part of a safety audit conducted of Australian Beaches, Short found that Kurrawa Beach has a hazard rating of 6/10. According to the SMH, he said, “like all beaches, danger increases under certain conditions. But I’m unaware of the circumstances on Wednesday (the day of the incident) that would have required extra caution.”

Barclay’s death has brought a number of issues that were raised in the Saxon Bird inquest last year back into the public domain, most significantly, the issue of risk controls in junior lifesaving events. An outcome of last year’s inquest was that the coroner recommended the use of flotation vests and helmets during surf lifesaving competitions. However, not only has this control been deemed by the lifesaving industry  to be ‘ridiculous’ and a potential cause of further accidents, in safety risk management, it is also an example of applying personal protective equipment (PPE) under the hierarchy of controls, as the least effective means of control.  For major risks or those with a high consequence outcome, such is the case here, PPE is the last line of defence, and is generally inappropriate unless supplementing other higher order controls.

The hierarchy of controls (pictured in the diagram below) is a commonly used set of mitigating control principles applied in safety risk management. The hierarchy applies a prioritised order of strategies ranging from elimination, (the most desirable strategy), to personal protective equipment (the least desirable strategy).

The more significant the risk, the higher the control strategy from the hierarchy, or combination of control strategies should be applied.  The ultimate aim is to eliminate safety hazards and their subsequent risk (if possible) or, if this is not possible or appropriate, to minimise exposures to as low as reasonably practicable.

In the case of the Aussies, the risk requiring treatment is the drowning of a competitor – based upon the history of this competition, an apparently significant risk.  Personal protective equipment alone may therefore be an inappropriate control method and higher levels from the hierarchy are required. Given that surf conditions are subject to change which can be sudden and dramatic, it seems important that an option be in placed to either eliminate the risk completely by cancelling the event, or relocating the event (even at short notice) if required. Substituting Kurrawa Beach for a location with less dangerous surf conditions is likely to reduce the risk of drowning far more significantly than helmets and life vests. Alternatively, the implementation of a system of ‘isolation’ could be implemented whereby junior events, whose contestants are physically more at risk than adults in large surf, could be postponed until conditions abate.

The tragic deaths of Matthew Barclay, Saxon Bird and Robert Gatenby while competing in junior surf lifesaving titles suggest that the risks involved in these competitions require more stringent controls than those currently in place. Despite the fact that surf lifesavers are universally praised for risking their lives to save others, it is the responsibility of the organisers of junior competitions to take all reasonable measures to ensure the safety of participants.

In risk management theory, risk culture is an important part of effective risk management.  That is, the culture of the organisation must be one that is forward thinking, innovative and risk aware.  While surf lifesaving is undoubtedly progressive and aware of the risks associated with the ocean and the surf, it is an organisation that has a long history in Australia with entrenched cultures.  The challenge will be to reflect on these incidents and challenge long held beliefs about the way such events are held.

While undoubtedly all members of surf lifesaving understand and accept the risks associated with their movement as do participants in competition, there is a public expectation that iconic sports such as this are safe. This is particularly so where presumably parents or guardians are approving of the level of risks on their children’s behalf. With three junior deaths in close succession clearly this is unacceptable and something needs to change.

Styne’s inspirational life had wide-reaching impacts. Not only has he been described as ‘Australia’s most successful sporting experiment’ but he also did considerable work with young people in the community through the Reach Foundation and Penguin Childcare Centres.

Born in Dublin, Ireland, Jim Stynes came to Australia as part of a recruitment program of Irish footballers for the Melbourne Demons Footballs Club. His career with the club included 264 games over the 1987 – 1998 seasons.  Between Round 17 1987 and Round 4 1988, he played 244 consecutive matches; an AFL record, and was the recipient of the 1991 Brownlow Medal.  Stynes also equalled Melbourne Football Club’s record for winning the club’s Best and Fairest award four times, in 1991, 1994, 1995 and 1997. In 2003, Stynes was inducted into the AFL Hall of Fame. He is also an official member of the Melbourne Football Club’s Team of the Century. In 2008 he became the chairman of Melbourne Football Club and held the position until he was forced to step down due to his health.

Jim co-founded the Reach Foundation, in 1994 with film director Paul Currie, to create a supportive and positive learning space for young people. Through this non-profit organsiation, Stynes worked to help 8-18 year olds feel valued and supported on their life paths and encourage their ambitiousness and self esteem. His work with the Reach foundation earned Stynes the Melbournian of the Year award in 2010, an Order of Australia and Church Fellowship in 2007 and the Victorian of the Year award in 2001 and 2003.

Jim also co-founded Pelican and Penguin Childcare in 2004 with business partner Hugh Ellis to address the need for quality care and early learning opportunities for children. They currently have 15 centres operating throughout Victoria and Queensland.

Even through his cancer battle, Jim continued to contribute to community welfare through these organsiations. He even developed a breakfast cereal product, Jimbo Super Muesli, because his health condition triggered an appreciation for the nutritionally beneficial ‘super foods’.

Stynes leaves behind wife, Sam, children Matisse and Tiernan and a legacy of both sporting brilliance and community contribution which will be honoured for years to come.  His death serves as another reminder of the risks associated with skin cancer in Australia.

The problem for festival goers was however that the promoter was unable to recuperate expenses paid on the event and therefore could not provide refunds for the $200 tickets that people had purchased in advance. The promoter had not taken out insurance against natural disasters forcing cancellation of the festival and according to the Sydney Morning Herald, conceded in hindsight that this had been a mistake.  He pointed to a number of positive measures that had been taken to protect against rain-related risk including monitoring the weather and the level of Warragamba Dam and ensuring that the event site had an effective drainage system.  Unfortunately in this case it was not foreseen that there could be a need to transfer the risk entirely to a third party.

Customers who bought their tickets via credit card through the ticket provider Green Tix have been able to secure refunds. All others have been advised to raise a dispute with their bank, PayPal or their ticket provider. Difficulties have arisen for some ticket holders given time and other limitations placed on dispute-raising by the policies of some ticketing and payment gateways. Paypal’s Buyer Protection Policy for example only covers disputes that are raised within 45 days of purchase and applies exclusively to tangible (as opposed to electronic) tickets.

Recognising that the incident has caused a large degree of inconvenience and frustration, Mr Rigby stated, “if I had $20 left to pay back someone’s ticket, then I would” however he maintains that “we haven’t tried to do anything deceitful, honestly.” According to a spokesman for NSW Fair Trading, formal investigation into Mr Rigby’s practices will not be conducted because, “the circumstances of the cancellation of the concert are not entirely attributable to this trader.”

What this case does highlight however is the importance for event organisers to purchase insurance which covers event cancellation under all reasonably foreseeable circumstances.  While a natural disaster may be unavoidable, the risk of not being able to refund ticket holders is one that can be controlled. Failing to do so can result in significant financial duress for the promoter and longer term reputational damage both for the promoter and the event itself. It is important that the cost of such insurance is factored into the budget for an event as a safeguard against the consequences of risk factors beyond their immediate control, that can force the disruption or cancellation of the event.

Taking to social media, Beto’s devastated girlfriend described his death as a ‘cruel injustice’ and has reignited the debate over the safety of tasers.

Currently all NSW general duties police officers carry tasers and their use is regulated by a document entitled, Use of Electronic Control, (TASER) Devices by the NSW Police Force (2011). According to NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell (reported in the Australian), “tasers were provided to police to give them a non-lethal alternative to their guns in dealing with people who were threatening or causing concern”.

Among its various provisions, the Use of Electronic Control, (TASER) Devices by the NSW Police Force document sets out taser training requirements and specific methods and criteria to control their use.

It states for example that police are only to use tasers to:

• Protect human life
• Protect yourself or others from person/s where violent confrontation or resistance is occurring or imminent
• Protect officer/s in danger of being over powered or to protect themselves or another person from injury
• (Provide) protection from animals

According to the ABC, incidents of taser deployment by NSW police officers have decreased from 1,151 times in 2010 to 881 times in 2011, despite the increase in the number of ‘stun guns’ carried collectively by the force (currently 1,272). However the impending coronial inquest and Ombudsman’s investigation into Beto’s death is likely to revisit the argument that existing training and controls regarding their use are not enough. Acting Police Commissioner Alan Clarke has warned against drawing this conclusion before formal inquiries have taken place.

While the brand of the NSW Police Force arguably took a blow following Beto’s death, the following week, the capture of Australia’s most wanted criminal, Malcom Naden restored some of its public image and community support. Naden, who has been on the run for seven years was arrested outside the NSW town of Gloucester, north of Newcastle and charged with the murder of a 24 year old girl, aggravated indecent assault and shooting with intent to kill a police officer.

Police endured harsh physical conditions during the operation which led them to find Mr Naden hiding in dense shrub. A report on ABC’s Lateline described the police effort as being ‘an outstanding job’.

From being publically scrutinised, to vindicated in the space of a week; the NSW Police Force has experienced a dramatic shift in community perception. Given the seriousness with which the community views public safety policing will always be under close public and media scrutiny.

At first instance, the case was decided in favour of the plaintiff. The District Court held that Woolworth’s was negligent in failing to inspect the area sufficiently regularly. It was found that the last inspection of the food court prior to the accident occurred more than four hours before. The conclusion was reached that on the balance of probabilities, the plaintiff would not have been injured had Woolworth’s implemented a more frequent cleaning schedule.

Woolworth’s successfully appealed the claim in the NSW Court of Appeal but the recent High Court judgment restored the District Court’s original verdict. A majority of the High Court held that in order to exercise reasonable care to the extent required by its legal duty, Woolworth’s needed to insure that the inspection of and removal of hazards from the sidewalk sales area bordering the food court takes place no less than every 20 minutes.

Personal injury lawyer with Maurice Blackburn, Majed Issa summarised the court’s findings as to the scope of the duty of the duty of care involved as follows:

“In this case the High Court agreed that shopping centres and stores should have in place a reasonable inspection and cleaning system that would detect and remove hazards that could cause injury within a reasonable timeframe.”

The risk of injury from a slip, trip or fall is one of which every public venue needs to be aware. As this case demonstrates, compensating an individual injured through negligence can be extremely costly. The timely inspection and cleaning of floor surfaces to remove any potential slip and trip hazards is legally required of venue occupiers and managers in exercising their duty of care to the members of the public.

How frequently such procedures should occur however depends upon the use of the space concerned.  Food courts generally attract a constant flow of pedestrian activity. Food and beverage spillage additionally increases the risk of a slip and trip accident. Consequently, food courts and other similar public spaces require continuous inspection and cleaning to control the risk.

Brand image and reputation is a risk category that concerns all organisations operating in the public sphere. It reflects the values and behaviours that are held in high esteem by their stakeholders and the community.

In politics brand risk is measured through polling. Regular samples of measurable public opinion convey the public’s sentiment regarding how well a person or party meets public expectation and confidence.

ASX listed companies can also measure brand value.  This can be reflected by share price performance.  While share price is a reflection of company value in the marketplace it also reflects the shareholders perception about the image and reputation of the brand.

Most other non-listed organsiations by comparison have fewer mechanisms available to measure their brand image and reputation on a continuous basis. In fields where measurable means of brand assessment are too costly, organisations need to be creative in developing ways to gauge stakeholder perception.

For businesses that deal directly with the consumer, social media can offer a risk indicator for measuring brand risk. Discussion generated through a variety of online forums, as well as tweets, status updates, fan pages and blogs can provide insight into an organisation’s reputation and changes in levels of public support.  Such methods are measurable and quantifiable and can reflect a tone of public sentiment.  Other methods might include customer surveys and the level of repeatable business.

In the case of Federal Labor with 18 months before the next election, it will remain to be seen whether they can recover from the last month’s disaster and restore the public’s faith in the party’s ‘brand’.