Civil Liability Act
Cox v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWCA 190 It was not appropriate specificallyto identify the Ferris wheel in the characterisation of the risk of harm: at [1] (Meagher JA); [41]-[42] (Payne JA); [85] (Emmett AJA). Although the risk of harm must be identified with sufficient specificity to capture the harm which resulted from its materialisation on the facts of…
Read MoreWollongong City Council v Williams [2021] NSWCA 140 TORTS — Negligence — Appellant injured as a result of falling on the first step on a stepped path in a park — Whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had breached the duty of care which it owed to the respondent — Primary…
Read MoreMenz v Wagga Wagga Show Society Inc [2020] NSWCA 65 Leeming JA: The claim under the Australian Consumer Law At [94]-[104], the primary judge rejected the allegations for contravention of s 60 of the Australian Consumer Law, which provides that: “If a person supplies, in trade or commerce, services to a consumer, there is a…
Read MoreHallmark Construction Pty Ltd v Brett Harford; Copeland Building Services Pty Ltd v Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd; Hallmark Construction Pty Ltd v Harford Transport Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 41 On 24 May 2013, before dawn, Brett Harford was delivering supplies to a building site in Homebush West. On arrival, the builder’s supervisor, Mr Isaia, directed him…
Read MoreSection 3B of the Civil Liability Act only excludes the operation of the Act where the conduct that is the subject of proceedings was intentional, and done with intent to cause injury; the Act is not excluded merely because the proceedings relate to an intentional tort: [8], [51], [169]. [8] As this Court has noted on a number…
Read MoreLandpower Australia Pty Ltd v Penske Power Systems Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 161 Bell P: Further consideration 39. In Hunt & Hunt Lawyers v Mitchell Morgan Nominees Pty Ltd (2013) 247 CLR 613; [2013] HCA 10 at [16], French CJ, Hayne and Kiefel JJ said: “The evident purpose of Pt 4 [of the CLA] is…
Read MoreIn 2015 the appellant, then aged 70, tripped outside the entrance to an aged care facility operated by the respondent. The surface of that area consisted of large, flat concrete slabs bordered by rows of red bricks. There were height differences of 10–20 mm between the edges of the concrete and brick pavers, which had…
Read More
NEGLIGENCE – occupier’s liability – customer trips and falls in appellant’s premises while entering a children’s play area – play area had raised shock-absorbent surface – primary judge found failure to warn and failure to make surface of play area level with remainder of premises were breaches of duty which caused the injury – findings…
Read More
Recent Comments