Search This Blog

Sunday, December 5, 2010

Another look at causation in shopping centre spillage cases

Harris v Woolworths Ltd [2000] NSWCA 312

11 November 2010

Hodgson JA:

 "34 On the question of causation, in my opinion cases such as Franklins Limited v Brown [2000] NSWCA 177, Drakos v Woolworths (South Australia) Limited (1991) 56 SASR 431, and Kocis v SE Dickens Pty Ltd t/as Coles New World Supermarket [1998] 3 VR 408 do not mean that, once a breach of duty is proved giving rise to a risk that a floor will become slippery, the plaintiff does not have to prove on the balance of probabilities that fulfilment of the duty would have prevented the accident. In my opinion, a contrary position at common law is indicated in cases such as Brady v Girvan Bros Pty Ltd (1986) 7 NSWLR 241, Rose v Abbey Orchard Property Investments Pty Ltd (1987) Aust Torts Report 80-121, Shoeys Pty Limited v Allan (1991) Aust Torts Report 81-104, and Woolworths Limited v Strong [2010] NSWCA 282. The question of causation is now dealt with by ss 5D and 5E of the Civil Liability Act 2002. Those provisions confirm that proof of causation of the nature I have indicated is a requisite for liability."

1 comment:

  1. hi was just seeing if you minded a comment. i like your website and the thme you picked is super. I will be back. battery powered carts industrial

    ReplyDelete

The Watching Brief is intended as a first point of reference and should not be relied on as a substitute for professional advice. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to particular circumstances.