Uncetainty in claiming damages for defects in property

In Project Management Company No 2 Pty Ltd v Cushway Blackford & Associates Pty Ltd [2011] QCA 102 the appellant sought leave to join its parent company party (Project Management Company No 1) as a plaintiff to the proceedings and to amend its statement of claim. It was argued that the parent company had suffered the loss claimed in the proceedings, rather than the appellant. Rule 69(1)(b)(ii) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) allows a court at any stage of the proceeding to order that ‘a person whose presence before the court would be desirable, just and convenient to enable the court to adjudicate effectually and completely on all matters in dispute connected with the proceeding’ be include as a party. To determine this issue, the Court of Appeal had to review the law relevant to the proceedings – a claim in negligence for pure economic loss, in particular, the principles espoused by the High Court in Bryan v Maloney(1995) 182 CLR 609 and Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd v CDG Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 515.

Insurance and the law of negligence : an influential or irrelevant persuader?

This article examines, from both within and outside the context of compulsory third party motor vehicle insurance, the different academic and judicial perspectives regarding the relevance of insurance to the imposition of negligence liability via the formulation of legal principle. In particular, the utility of insurance in setting the standard of care held owing by a learner driver to an instructor in Imbree v McNeilly is analysed and the implications of this High Court decision, in light of current jurisprudential argument and for other principles of negligence liability, namely claimant vulnerability, are considered. It concludes that ultimately one’s stance as to the relevance, or otherwise, of insurance to the development of the common law of negligence will be predominately influenced by normative views of torts’ function as an instrument of corrective or distributive justice.

Neural interface systems : a new legal frontier?

In an age where digital innovation knows no boundaries, research in the area of brain-computer interface and other neural interface devices go where none have gone before. The possibilities are endless and as dreams become reality, the implications of these amazing developments should be considered. Some of these new devices have been created to correct or minimise the effects of disease or injury so the paper discusses some of the current research and development in the area, including neuroprosthetics. To assist researchers and academics in identifying some of the legal and ethical issues that might arise as a result of research and development of neural interface devices, using both non-invasive techniques and invasive procedures, the paper discusses a number of recent observations of authors in the field. The issue of enhancing human attributes by incorporating these new devices is also considered. Such enhancement may be regarded as freeing the mind from the constraints of the body, but there are legal and moral issues that researchers and academics would be well advised to contemplate as these new devices are developed and used. While different fact situation surround each of these new devices, and those that are yet to come, consideration of the legal and ethical landscape may assist researchers and academics in dealing effectively with matters that arise in these times of transition. Lawyers could seek to facilitate the resolution of the legal disputes that arise in this area of research and development within the existing judicial and legislative frameworks. Whether these frameworks will suffice, or will need to change in order to enable effective resolution, is a broader question to be explored.

Long term exposure to asbestos satisfies test for causation

Background In Booth v Amaca Pty Ltd and Amaba Pty Ltd,1 the New South Wales Dust Diseases Tribunal awarded a retired motor mechanic $326 640 in damages for his malignant pleural mesothelioma allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos through working with the brake linings manufactured by the defendants. The evidence before the Tribunal was that the plaintiff had been exposed to asbestos prior to working as a mechanic from home renovations when he was a child and loading a truck as a youth. However, as a mechanic he had been exposed to asbestos in brake linings on which he worked from 1953 to 1983. Curtis DCJ held at [172] that the asbestos from the brake linings ‘materially contributed to [the plaintiff’s] contraction of mesothelioma’. This decision was based upon acceptance that the effect of exposure to asbestos on the development of mesothelioma was cumulative and rejection of theory that a single fibre of asbestos can cause the disease...

High court determines that it cannot be assumed that hot chips are only eaten at lunch

In Strong v Woolworth Ltd (t/as Big W) (2012) 285 ALR 420 the appellant was injured when she fell at a shopping centre outside the respondent’s premises. The appellant was disabled, having had her right leg amputated above the knee and therefore walked with crutches. One of the crutches came into contact with a hot potato chip which was on the floor, causing the crutch to slip and the appellant to fall. The appellant sued in negligence, alleging that the respondent was in breach of its duty of care by failing to institute and maintain a cleaning system to detect spillages and foreign objects within its sidewalk sales area. The issue before the High Court was whether it could be established on the balance of probabilities as to when the hot chip had fallen onto the ground so as to prove causation in fact...

Sport Management from a Legal Perspective

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the essential elements of sport management in Australia in the 1990's. The essential purpose is to view these elements from a legal perspective. In the past 12 months there has been at least three conferences in the sports law area. The majority of this paper has been allocated to the area of legal liability, especially the legal relationships evolving between the player and his co-participant, the player and his club, the player and his coach, and the duties and liabilities of the coach and the club. The area of insurance will also be discussed as it is a vital element in protecting the players, coaches and clubs in the event of any litigation. A well publicised case was that of Rogers v Bugden where the plaintiff Steven Rogers, who was a first grade rugby league football player for Cronulla, suffered a broken jaw and sued his co-participant Mark Bugden and Bugden's employer Canterbury/Bankstown District Rugby League Football Club. It was held that there was a contract of employment and Canterbury/Bankstown was found to be vicariously liable and was ordered to pay Rogers the sum of $68,154.00. The legal actions in tort and negligence are increasing. Sports managers will need to investigate thoroughly the protection available for their clients.

Full compensation no longer sacrosanct : reflections on the past and future economic loss ‘cap’ for high income earners

The civil liability provisions relating to the assessment of damages for past and future economic loss have abrogated the common law principle of full compensation by imposing restrictions on the damages award, most commonly by a “three times average weekly earnings” cap. This consideration of the impact of those provisions is informed by a case study of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal decision, Tuohey v Freemasons Hospital (Tuohey) , which addressed the construction and arithmetic operation of the Victorian cap for high income earners. While conclusions as to operation of the cap outside of Victoria can be drawn from Tuohey, a number of issues await judicial determination. These issues, which include the impact of the damages caps on the calculation of damages for economic loss in the circumstances of fluctuating income; vicissitudes; contributory negligence; claims per quod servitum amisit; and claims by dependants, are identified and potential resolutions discussed.

Compensation for lost services of an employee : pure economic loss and per quod action

Under the common law an employer may take action against a defendant for the loss of an employee’s services due to the act of the defendant (per quod servitium amisit - by reason of which the services were lost). The High Court has recently affirmed the existence of this ancient tort in Barclay v Penberthy [2012] HCA 40.

Howzat! The High Court, negligence and indoor cricket

This article examines the High Court case of Woods v Multi-Sport that considers the liability of an indoor cricket centre for an injury sustained by a player. It is a good example of how the issue of breach is dealt with in a sports law context and also shows how difficult it can be to determine when a sporting body will in breach of a duty of care owed to its participants.

Cattanach v Melchior : babies, blessings and burdens

This article considers the High Court decision of Cattanach v Melchior, which permitted the recovery of damages for the cost of raising a child born through medical negligence. It discusses the reasoning in each of the judgments and seeks to identify themes so as to explain the divide between the majority and minority. It also considers the impact of legislative intervention in Queensland and New South Wales.