Coote v Forestry Tasmania

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania concerning a claim for negligence. The appellant, an experienced tree feller, suffered severe injuries, rendering him paraplegic, when a branch fell from a tree and struck him. The appellant alleged that the respondent, Forestry Tasmania, through its forestry officer, was negligent in issuing a direction that altered his usual method of felling pulpwood trees, thereby causing him to place himself in a position of danger.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the Full Court erred in finding no negligence on the part of Forestry Tasmania, despite a finding by the trial judge that the respondent's forestry officer had given the appellant instructions that varied his normal work system. The court also considered whether any error of judgment by the appellant was relevant to the issue of contributory negligence. The appeal involved an examination of the respondent's statutory duties under the *Forestry Act 1920* (Tas) and the *Forest Practices Act 1985* (Tas), particularly concerning timber harvesting plans and the supervision of logging operations.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Full Court. The Court reasoned that the Full Court's conclusion of no negligence was not open to it in the circumstances, particularly in light of the trial judge's finding regarding the instructions given by the forestry officer. The High Court determined that the Full Court had not properly considered the centrality of this finding to the question of the respondent's negligence. The matter was remitted to the Full Court for determination of specific issues raised in the notice of appeal, with costs to be determined by that Court.