Cashman v Sydney Water Corporation

In *Cashman v Sydney Water Corporation*, the Supreme Court of New South Wales considered a dispute between the plaintiff, Mr Cashman, and the defendant, Sydney Water Corporation. Mr Cashman sought damages for personal injury allegedly sustained as a result of a fall on a public footpath adjacent to a property owned by Sydney Water. The plaintiff alleged that Sydney Water had a duty of care to maintain the footpath in a safe condition, and that its failure to do so caused his injuries.

The central legal issue before Emmett J was whether Sydney Water owed a duty of care to Mr Cashman in relation to the condition of the public footpath. Specifically, the court had to determine if Sydney Water, as the owner of the adjacent land, had a legal responsibility to ensure the safety of a public thoroughfare that was not under its direct control or ownership, and if so, the scope and extent of that duty.

Emmett J found that Sydney Water did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff in relation to the condition of the public footpath. His Honour reasoned that the footpath was a public road vested in and maintained by the local council, and not under the control or ownership of Sydney Water. The court applied the principle that a landowner generally does not owe a duty of care to persons using adjacent public land, unless there is a specific relationship or circumstance that creates such a duty, which was not established in this instance. The claim was therefore dismissed.