NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Hunt v Knight Frank (NSW) Pty Ltd & 2 Ors [2005] NSWCA 139
HEARING DATE(S): 8 October 2004
JUDGMENT DATE: 3 May 2005
JUDGMENT OF: Mason P at 1; Giles JA at 2; McColl JA at 3
DECISION: (1) Appeal allowed (2) Judgment below set aside (3) Judgment for the appellant against the second respondents on liability. (4) Cross-appeals dismissed (5) Save as to the costs of preparation of the Red Appeal Book, second respondents to pay the appellant's costs of his appeal against the second respondent, the second respondents' cross appeal and the appellant's costs of trial insofar as they concerned his case against them (6) Appellant to pay the third respondent's costs of the appeal and of the third respondent's cross appeal (7) Matter remitted to the District Court for hearing on damages.
CATCHWORDS: NEGLIGENCE - breach - whether reasonably foreseeable that a person exiting a lift would trip over a crate placed immediately in front of door - obligation on entrants to take reasonable care for own safety - EVIDENCE - inferences - whether evidence supported a reasonable and definite inference that someone for whose conduct the occupier was vicariously liable placed the crate in position - COSTS - whether a Bullock or Sanderson order appropriate (D)
LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Rules 1990
Abalos v Australian Postal Commission [1990] HCA 47; (1990) 171 CLR 167 Girlock (Sales) Pty Ltd v Hurrell [1982] HCA 15; (1982) 149 CLR 155 Gould v Vaggelas [1985] HCA 75; (1985) 157 CLR 215 Hampton Court Ltd v Crooks [1957] HCA 28; (1957) 97 CLR 367 Holloway v McFeeters [1956] HCA 25; (1956) 94 CLR 470 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 CASES CITED: Luxton v Vines [1952] HCA 19; (1952) 85 CLR 352 Morgan v Sherton Pty Ltd (1999) 46 NSWLR 141 Patrick Stevedores No 1 Pty Ltd v Kilkelly [2004] NSWCA 237 Phillis v Daly (1988) 15 NSWLR 65 Progressive Recycling Pty Ltd v Eversham [2003] NSWCA 268; (2003) 40 MVR 141 Roads and Traffic Authority v Snape [1999] NSWCA 47 State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd (in liq) (1999) 73 ALJR 306
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