Drew v. Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd

Drew brought an action against Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd for injuries sustained from a circular saw manufactured by the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the saw was defectively designed and manufactured, causing him to suffer serious injuries to his hand. The defendant denied the allegations and raised contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. The plaintiff also claimed for gratuitous services rendered by his partner, and for future medical expenses. The partner, who was receiving a carer’s allowance for the plaintiff's psychological condition unrelated to the subject injury, argued that this allowance should be considered in the assessment of damages.

The court was required to determine whether the manufacturer breached section 75AC of the Trade Practices Act by producing a defectively designed and manufactured circular saw. The court had to consider whether the plaintiff's injuries were caused by the alleged design and manufacturing faults, and whether the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. The court also had to decide whether the gratuitous services rendered by the plaintiff's partner could be included in the damages and whether the carer’s allowance should be taken into account in the assessment of damages.

The court found that the plaintiff's hand injuries were caused by the circular saw, which was defectively designed and manufactured by the defendant. The court held that the defendant breached section 75AC of the Trade Practices Act and was liable for the plaintiff's damages. The court found the plaintiff not to be contributorily negligent. The court also held that the gratuitous services rendered by the plaintiff's partner were relevant to the assessment of damages, but the carer’s allowance should not be taken into account. The court awarded the plaintiff damages for his injuries, loss of income, and future medical expenses.

The court ordered judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of $194,454.86 for damages. The court noted that further hearings would be held to determine the costs of the proceedings.