NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: P & H Property Service Pty Ltd v Branigan; Westfield Shopping Centre Management Co Pty Ltd v Branigan [2008] NSWCA 195
HEARING DATE(S): 29 May 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 11 August 2008
JUDGMENT OF: Hodgson JA at 1; Bell JA at 20; Rein J at 21
(1) Leave to amend the Notice of Appeal in the Westfield appeal refused. (2) Appeal of P & H allowed (3) Judgment and verdict against P & H set aside DECISION: (4) Verdict and judgment for P & H (5) Appeal of Westfield dismissed (6) Cross appeal dismissed (7) Westfield to pay the Respondent's costs of appeal (8) Westfield to pay any costs of P & H of the proceedings not otherwise borne by Westfield
CATCHWORDS: Third party injured as a result of alleged breach of duty by cleaner - Contractual obligation of cleaner considered - Quantum of damages - Consideration of pre-existing back condition, and capacity - Percentage of a most extreme case and earning capacity considered - Bullock order for costs
LEGISLATION CITED: Workers Compensation Act 1987 Civil Liability Act 2002
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Rose v Abbey Orchard Property Investments Pty Limited [1987] Australian Torts Reports 80-121 Kocis v S E Dickens Pty Limited [1998] 3 VR 408 CASES CITED: Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 368 Bullock v London Omnibus Co [1907] 1KB 269 Gould v Vaggelas (1985) 157 CLR 215
P & H Property Service Pty Ltd PARTIES: Westfield Shopping Centre Management Pty Ltd Nathan Branigan
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