Commissioner of Railways (WA) v Stewart

The case of *Commissioner of Railways (WA) v Stewart* involved an appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The respondents, Percy Andrew Victor Stewart and others, had sued the Commissioner of Railways for damages caused by flooding in 1934, alleging negligence in the construction and maintenance of a railway embankment. The embankment, constructed in 1885, had obstructed the natural flow of surface water, leading to flooding on both sides of the railway during a heavy rainfall event.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the Commissioner of Railways was liable for damage caused by the negligent construction of the railway, which predated his statutory corporate existence and the Crown's liability in tort. The court also had to determine if the construction of the railway embankment constituted negligence, and if the statutory authority to build and maintain the railway provided a defence. Furthermore, the court considered whether the exceptionally heavy rainfall constituted an "act of God" that would absolve the Commissioner of liability, and whether the evidence supported the finding of negligence and the extent of the damage caused by the embankment.

The High Court, affirming the decision of the Supreme Court, held that the Commissioner of Railways was liable. The court reasoned that the cause of action was complete in 1934 when the damage occurred, and the relevant legislation, particularly the Crown Suits Act 1898 and the Government Railways Act 1904, made the Commissioner the proper party to sue for wrongs related to the railways. The court found that the construction of the embankment was negligent, as it failed to make adequate provision for the flow of water, and the statutory authority to construct the railway did not excuse this negligence. The rainfall, while exceptionally heavy, was not considered an "act of God" as it was not of such magnitude that no reasonably prudent engineer could have anticipated or guarded against it.

The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in favour of the plaintiffs was affirmed. The Commissioner of Railways was ordered to pay damages to the plaintiffs for the losses they suffered due to the flooding.