She signed a deed in 2008, then spent a decade trying to undo it

Sara Rossi was a long-haul flight attendant with Qantas from 1988 until 2003, when she took voluntary redundancy. In 2006 she made a workers' compensation claim for a psychological injury she said was caused by her work. Qantas denied it, and the case was listed for trial in late 2008.

Shortly before a settlement conference, the psychiatrist assessing her for her own lawyers revised his view of how much of her illness was work-related, which put her claim in 'severe peril'. At the conference Qantas offered $50,000. Two days later, after her lawyer read his written advice to her, Qantas raised the offer to $75,000 plus $40,000 for legal costs. With her lawyer and barrister at the conference, she signed a deed releasing Qantas from all claims arising from her employment.

She was distressed that evening and later refused the money. A decade on she lodged a discrimination complaint about her time at Qantas. To pursue it, she first had to have the 2008 deed set aside, and she argued she had lacked the mental capacity to make it.

The Full Court said the test is whether she could have understood the general nature of the deal if it had been explained to her. This deed was simple: she would be paid, the case would end, and she could bring no further claim. 'That is not a complex concept.' The evidence showed she had understood the offer and the psychiatrist's revised view, and had asked about the confidentiality term so she could talk to her family. Even her own expert psychiatrist accepted she could understand the deed's general nature.

The trial judge had accepted she was suffering from depression and felt distress. But being unwell and upset is not the same as being unable to understand what you sign. The appeal was dismissed, with costs.