Commissioner for Railways (NSW) v Anderson - [1961] HCA 38

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

McTiernan, Fullagar, Kitto, Taylor and Menzies JJ.

COMMISSIONER FOR RAILWAYS (N.S.W.) v. ANDERSON

(1961) 105 CLR 42

23 June 1961

Negligence

Negligence—Dangerous premises—Unusual danger—Invitee—Injured by rail fixed horizontally four feet from the ground between two posts at the entrance to a railway station—Liability of invitor for injury—Invitee's knowledge of the existence of the structure—Appreciation of the risk—Onus of proof—Invitor's knowledge of the existence of the structure—Duty of care—Whether injury from the structure reasonably foreseeable.

Decisions

1961, June 23.
The following written judgments were delivered: -
McTIERNAN J. This appeal concerns an action brought by the respondent in the Supreme Court of New South Wales to recover damages from the appellant for an injury which the respondent suffered on 12th October 1955 at the appellant's premises in Fairfield where the railway station is situated. These premises were entered by members of the public from the street, known as The Crescent, through posts erected on the frontage. The first and second posts on the left were five feet high and four feet apart and the rest of the posts were about four feet high but so arranged that only one person at a time could enter or leave through any of the spaces between them. There was no obstruction between the first and second posts, but directly opposite to them at a distance of four feet inside the frontage were two other posts, both five feet high and four feet apart, between which a beam was mortised at the height of four feet from the ground; and there was a similar beam between the first post and that opposite it inside the frontage, and between the second post and the one opposite to it. (at p47)

2. At 6.30 a.m. on the abovementioned date - it was then daylight - the respondent entered the premises between the first and second posts on the left and in attempting to stoop under the cross beam between the two posts inside the frontage, bumped the top of his head against it and fell upon his buttocks. As a result of the impact with the cross beam the respondent sustained a severe spinal injury. The respondent was entering the premises for the purpose of travelling by train. He alleged accordingly in the action that he was an invitee when the injury occurred. (at p47)

3. The first count of the declaration pleaded a cause of action founded on the well-known passage in the judgment of Willes J. in Indermaur v. Dames (1866) LR 1 CP 274 in which the principle of the occupier's liability in tort to an invitee is stated: "with respect to such a visitor at least, we consider it settled law, that he, using reasonable care on his part for his own safety, is entitled to expect that the occupier shall on his part use reasonable care to prevent damage from unusual danger, which he knows or ought to know; and that, where there is evidence of neglect, the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Commissioner for Railways (NSW) v Anderson and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1961] HCA 38
Decision Date: 23 June 1961

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Commissioner for Railways (NSW) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a judgment of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in favour of the respondent, Anderson. The dispute concerned Anderson's claim for damages for injuries sustained while employed by the Commissioner.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Commissioner was liable for the injuries suffered by Anderson, who alleged negligence on the part of the Commissioner. Specifically, the court considered whether the Commissioner had breached its duty of care to provide a safe system of work for its employees, and if so, whether that breach caused Anderson's injuries.

The court analysed the evidence presented regarding the circumstances of Anderson's injury, which occurred when he was struck by a train while performing his duties. The judges considered the adequacy of the safety precautions in place at the time and the extent to which the Commissioner had fulfilled its obligations to ensure the safety of its workers. The principles of negligence, including duty of care, breach of duty, and causation, were central to the court's deliberations.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Commissioner was not liable for Anderson's injuries. The court held that the Commissioner had taken reasonable precautions to ensure the safety of its employees and that the accident was not attributable to any breach of duty on the part of the Commissioner.

Orders