ROBINSON v BAPTIST CHURCHES [1999] NSWCA 226

New South Wales Court of Appeal CITATION : ROBINSON v BAPTIST CHURCHES [1999] NSWCA 226 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40281/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 10 March 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 19 August 1999

PARTIES : Irene Robinson v Baptist Churches of New South Wales Property Trust JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 1; Handley JA at 2; Sheppard AJA at 24

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : DC 187/97 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : Blanch CJ

COUNSEL : R R Bartlett SC (Appellant) D F Rofe QC/B Hull (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Stanger & Clarke (Appellant) Malcolm Johns & Co (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : NEGLIGENCE - personal injury - elderly woman falling in church hall - peas spilled on floor - whether inference available as to cause of spillage - whether system for cleaning up ought to have been in place ACTS CITED : The Baptist Churches of NSW Property Trust Act 1984 Brady v Girvan Bros Pty Ltd (1986) 7 NSWLR 241 CASES CITED: Hampton Court Ltd v Crooks (1957) 97 CLR 367 Nicol v Allyacht Spas Pty Ltd (1987) 163 CLR 611 DECISION : Appeal allowed with costs. Orders made.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40281/98 DC 187/97 MEAGHER JA HANDLEY JA SHEPPARD AJA

19 August 1999 IRENE ROBINSON v BAPTIST CHURCHES OF NEW SOUTH WALES PROPERTY TRUST

NEGLIGENCE - personal injury - elderly woman falling in church hall - peas spilled on floor - whether inference available as to cause of spillage - whether system for cleaning up ought to have been in place The appellant had sued the respondents as the owners of a church hall. She had slipped on some peas spilled on the floor. The trial Judge was unable to draw an inference as to the cause of the spillage and rejected an allegation that the respondents were negligent in failing to have a system in place for cleaning up food spillages. HELD : Allowing the appeal: (1) The facts enabled an inference to be drawn as to the cause of the spillage. On the balance of probabilities the peas were spilt as a result of the negligence of the helpers who were agents of the organisers of the lunch. (2) The respondent was not negligent in failing to establish a system for cleaning up food spillages. ORDERS (1) Appeal allowed with costs, other than the costs of including in the appeal book material relevant only to the issue of damages; (2) Judgment of the District Court set aside; (3) In lieu thereof order that there be judgment for the plaintiff for damages to be assessed and an order that the defendant pay the costs of the first trial; (4) Remit the proceedings to the District Court for a new trial limited to damages, the costs of the new trial to abide the order of the Judge presiding at that trial; (5) The respondent to have a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act if qualified. THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40281/98 DC 187/97 MEAGHER JA HANDLEY JA SHEPPARD AJA