High Court of Australia
Cons Cons Cons Cons Cons Cons
jon) weal Paki 20 ore SWLR 529 co ling me) pa 1568) oY Cons . Hiiey — Hey Sy Manele riongle "y frome fous eae
il vrail come aineil Shopping |, to 'entre v Anzil ALR AIL Some BPR} Z0S
256 HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.)
SMITH . 3 . Ee . 3 : F . APPELLANT ; PLAINTIFF, AND LEURS AND OTHERS : ' : ' . ResponpeENtTs. Drrenpants,
H.C. or A. Infants and Children—Liability of parent for torts of child—Parent's duty of care—
1945. Permitting boy to have shanghai.
Ee L., a boy aged thirteen years, while engaged in play, fired a stone from a ee shanghai and hit S., another boy, in the eye, seriously damaging his sight. vie! S. sued L's parents claiming damages for negligence in failing to control L.
MELBOURNE, and in allowing him to have and use the shanghai, There was evidence that Oct, 22. the parents knew the boy had a shanghai, had warmed him of the danger of
latiame.s, ¥8i8g it, and had forbidden him to use it outside the limits of his home, 'There penne was no evidence that L. had any vicious tendencies.
Sona we Held that in the circumstances of the case the parents were not guilty of
any breach of duty. Decision of the Supreme Court of South Australia (Full Conrt), affirmed.
Appear from the Supreme Court of South Australia.
Brian Leurs, a boy aged 13 at the material time, was the adopted child, under the Adoption of Children Act 1925-1943 (S.A.), of Henry Edward Leurs (hereinafter called " the father ") and Winifred Mary Leurs (hereinafter called "the mother"). There was no evidence that he had any vicious propensities, but, as his father and his mother were aware, he was in possession of a shanghai. The father said that he had warned the boy of danger in using the shanghai, and the mother that she had told him that he must use it only at the side of the house and must shoot towards the wall. This latter instruction was disobeyed, and on 17th December 1943 Leurs was away from his home with the shanghai in his possession. On this day two groups of boys, which also included William Brian Smith,
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate