Cox v Mid-Coast Council

Case [2021] NSWCA 190


Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: Cox v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWCA 190
Hearing dates: 8 July 2021
Date of orders: 31 August 2021
Decision date: 31 August 2021
Before: Meagher JA at [1]; Payne JA at [2]; Emmett AJA at [72]
Decision:

(1)    Appeal dismissed;

(2)    Appellant to pay the costs of the respondent.

Catchwords:

NEGLIGENCE – dangerous recreational activities – appellant suffered injury in mid-air collision between light aircraft and Ferris wheel – appellant engaged in dangerous recreational activity of landing at an unregulated aircraft landing area – whether appellant suffered harm as the result of the materialisation of an obvious risk of a dangerous recreational activity – appropriate level of generality when characterising risk – obviousness of risk – appellant’s harm resulted from manifestation of the obvious risk of colliding with obstructions in the splay of the landing area – appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:

Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (Cth), r 92

Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ss 5B, 5C, 5F, 5G, 5K, 5L

Cases Cited:

Alameddine v Glenworth Valley Horse Riding Pty Ltd (2015) 324 ALR 355; [2015] NSWCA 219

Carey v Lake Macquarie City Council [2007] NSWCA 4; (2007) Aust Torts Reports ¶81–874

Carter v Hastings River Greyhound Racing Club (2020) 102 NSWLR 691; [2020] NSWCA 185

Council of the City of Greater Taree v Wells [2010] NSWCA 147; (2010) Aust Torts Reports ¶82–063

Cox v Mid-Coast Council [2020] NSWSC 1710

Echin v Southern Tablelands Gliding Club [2013] NSWSC 516

Fallas v Mourlas (2006) 65 NSWLR 418; [2006] NSWCA 32

Kempsey Shire Council v Five Star Medical Centre Pty Ltd (2018) 99 NSWLR 98; [2018] NSWCA 308

Menz v Wagga Wagga Show Society Inc (2020) 103 NSWLR 103; [2020] NSWCA 65

Singh v Lynch (2020) 103 NSWLR 568; [2020] NSWCA 152

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Paul Clarendon Cox (Appellant)
Mid-Coast Council (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
CT Barry QC and R Royle (Appellant)
R Sheldon SC (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Shine Lawyers (Appellant)
Mills Oakley (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/354018
Publication restriction: None
 Decision under appeal 
Court or tribunal:
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction:
Common Law Division
Citation:

[2020] NSWSC 1710

Date of Decision:
01 December 2020
Before:
Rothman J
File Number(s):
2014/286417

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

On 1 October 2011, the appellant suffered personal injury during an attempted landing at Old Bar Aircraft Landing Area (“Old Bar ALA”) when his aircraft collided with a Ferris wheel. The Ferris wheel had been erected two days prior to the incident, and encroached on the “splay”, being the area through which aircraft may travel when taking-off from or landing at the grass airstrip at the Old Bar ALA. The Old Bar ALA is an unlicensed aerodrome and is not subject to any legal requirements or regulatory oversight in relation to safety.

The primary judge found that s 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) prevented the appellant from succeeding in…

Continue reading Cox v Mid-Coast Council

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cox v Mid-Coast Council [2021] NSWCA 190
Case
[2021] NSWCA 190
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Cox, brought proceedings against the respondent, Mid-Coast Council, alleging negligence after suffering injury in a mid-air collision between a light aircraft and a Ferris wheel. The incident occurred as the appellant was landing at an unregulated aircraft landing area. The primary legal question before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales was whether the appellant's harm resulted from the materialisation of an obvious risk of a dangerous recreational activity, as contemplated by the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW).

The court was required to determine the appropriate level of generality at which to characterise the risk of harm. Specifically, it needed to assess whether the risk of colliding with obstructions in the splay of the landing area was an obvious risk associated with the appellant's recreational activity. The court also considered whether the appellant's knowledge of the risk was relevant to the determination of obviousness.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the appellant was engaged in the dangerous recreational activity of landing at an unregulated aircraft landing area. It found that the risk of colliding with obstructions within the landing splay was an obvious risk, meaning a risk that, to a reasonable person in the position of the appellant, would have been apparent. The court held that the appellant's harm resulted from the manifestation of this obvious risk, as the Ferris wheel constituted such an obstruction. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Appeal dismissed;

(2) Appellant to pay the costs of the respondent.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.