Reid v Target Australia Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 60

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Reid v Target Australia Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCA 60 Hearing dates: 29 November 2013 Decision date: 17 March 2014 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1] Ward JA at [2] Emmett JA at [103] Decision: Appeal dismissed with costs. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: EVIDENCE - whether primary judge should have drawn Jones v Dunkel inferences - whether other inferences should have been drawn in absence of oral evidence TORTS - negligence - whether duty of care to monitor area outside leased premises for persons carrying beverages Cases Cited: Brady v Girvan bros Ltd t/as Minto Mall (1986) 7 NSWLR 241 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 Strong v Woolworths Ltd [2012] HCA 5: (2012) 246 CLR 182 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Trina Reid (Appellant) Target Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T Molomby SC with M Daley (Appellant) M T McCulloch SC with R Gambi (Respondent) Solicitors: Brydens Law Office (Appellant) McCabe Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): CA 2012/244650 Decision under appeal Date of Decision: 2012-07-13 00:00:00 Before: Neilson DCJ File Number(s): DC 2010/376891