Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
BREL-OFF
CARR
THE STATE OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
JUDGMENT MASON J.
| (Oral) WILSON J.
BRENNAN J.
DEANE J.
DAWSON J.
CARR
THE STATE OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
At first instance Sangster J. and, on appeal, the
Full Court found that the injuries sustained by the
appellant when he slipped on 16 July 1973 on the stairs of
the Cross Keys Hotel at Gepps Cross were not caused or
contributed to by the negligence of the respondent as his
employer. The negligence alleged is that the respondent,
knowing that the appellant suffered from a stiff back due to
fusion of discs and to a serious psychological disorder, and
aware of a report dated 18 January 1972 by the
Director-General of Public Health recommending that the
appellant should continue in employment and that he was
suitable for occupations which did not involve travel by car
over long distances or heavy responsibility, nevertheless
assigned him, without objection on his part, as a licensing
inspector with responsibility for inspecting country
licensed premises. The performance of this duty involved
him in travelling some distance by car.
The conclusion reached in the courts below was
that, even assuming negligence on the part of the respondent
in assigning the appellant to country inspections involving
travelling distances by car, this breach of duty did not
cause or contribute to his slipping on the stairs of the
Cross Keys Hotel. In this respect we should mention that
the appellant, when employed in the performance of clerical
and administrative duties before being assigned to country
inspections, daily ascended and descended-stairs in the
course of his employment without suffering any adverse
consequences. This circumstance, quite apart from the
absence of evidence to suggest otherwise, in our view made
it impossible for the courts below to find that there was
involved in the assignment of the appellant to country
inspections a foreseeable risk of his injury in ascending or
descending stairs or to find that the respondent should
reasonably have foreseen some such risk of injury. Nor was
there any basis in the evidence for a finding that the
employer was or should have been aware of the possibility
that the appellant would, by reason of his pre-existing back
condition, suffer serious injury or aggravation or injury
from a minor trip or slip of a type that might be thought
likely to occur on inspection of country hotels.
On the evidence we can see no legitimate basis for
interfering with the finding of the courts below on the
issue of causation. We would merely add that the evidence
does not indicate that the appellant slipped on the stairs
by reason of the physical disability or psychiatric disorder
from which he suffered.
The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.
—
"
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
THE STATE OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered at ........... ADELAIDE,
h A
ON seve
RM74/30574