Category: Duty of Care
-
Careless acts and careless omissions: the distinction in tort
in Duty of CareAlthough the distinction may at times be difficult to draw, there is an important difference in tort law between "careless acts causing personal injury, for which the law generally imposes liability, and careless omissions to prevent acts [by a third party] … for which the common law generally imposes no liability".46 Modbury is an illustration…
-
Cullen v New South Wales
in Duty of CareCullen v NSW [2026] HCA 19 In a paradigm case of physical injury suffered by a plaintiff as a result of the defendant taking some positive action, the class of persons to whom the defendant owes a duty of care comprises those persons exposed to a reasonably foreseeable risk of physical harm from the defendant's…
-
Pleading an established duty of care
in Duty of Carehttps://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2026/22.html#_Ref223681247 42. In cases involving an established duty, to plead the existence and scope of the duty it commonly will be sufficient for a plaintiff simply to identify facts showing that each of the plaintiff and defendant fell within the established category involving a duty to take reasonable care to avoid an identified risk of…
-
Duty to prevent criminal conduct: non-delegable duty
in Duty of CareTrustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle v AA [2025] NSWCA 72 There is no non-delegable duty to ensure that a delegate does not commit an intentional criminal act: at [17] (Bell CJ); [156]-[168] (Leeming JA); [253] (Ball JA). Bird v DP [2024] HCA 41; 419 ALR 552 at [38]- [43];…
-
Building site Head contractor: liability to and for the employees of others
Hallmark 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…
-
Police powers and duties: incoherence and incompatibility; Summary dismissal
CIVIL PROCEDURE – summary disposal – dismissal of proceedings – primary judge summarily dismissed proceedings on basis that defendant did not owe plaintiffs a duty of care – where weight of current authority against existence of duty of care – where argument available that common law should be extended to recognise duty of care –…
-
Corporate structure and duty of care
Strategic Formwork Pty Ltd v Hitchen [2018] NSWCA 54 The Court (Basten JA, Sackville AJA and Simpson JA) allowed the appeal on damages in part but otherwise dismissed the appeal; by majority the Court (Basten JA and Sackville AJA, Simpson JA dissenting) dismissed the cross-appeal. The Court held: In relation to (i): (1) Neither the separate…
-
Solicitor's duty beyond the retainer
AS BANNISTER & ORS v SIRROM ENTERPRISES PTY LTD [2016] SASCFC 153 85. The extent to which the duty requires a solicitor to advise on matters beyond a client’s express instructions is problematic. In Micarone v Perpetual Trustees Australia Ltd,[1] Debelle and Wicks JJ identified the scope of a solicitor’s duty of care as follows:[2]
-
Police officers: duty of care owed by State
State of New South Wales v Briggs [2016] NSWCA 344 1. Per curiam: In relation to the numerically large body of police officers, breach of a duty of care must be assessed in light of a postulated system that should have been devised, or a general instruction which should have been given, and which would probably have…