EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY -v- CZATRYKO [2002] WASCA 334

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2002] WASCA 334
Court:	THE FULL COURT (WA)
Case No:	FUL:126/2001	Heard:	18 JUNE 2002
Coram:	WALLWORK J MURRAY J TEMPLEMAN J	Delivered:	9/12/02
No of pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal allowed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY BRETT GEORGE JERZY CZATRYKO
Catchwords:	Negligence Personal injuries Worker loading truck fell off Stepped back thinking hoist was raised Hoist was being lowered No breach of duty of care to fail to warn worker
Legislation:	Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA), s 19 Occupiers Liability Act 1985 (WA), s 5
Case References:	Chappel v Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232 Nagle v Rottnest Island Authority (1993) 177 CLR 423 Romeo v Conservation Commission (NT) (1998) 192 CLR 431 Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434 Woods v Multi-Sport Holdings Pty Ltd (2002) 76 ALJR 483 Bankstown Foundry Pty Ltd v Braistina (1986) A Tort Rep 80-713 Bowen v Tutte (1990) A Tort Rep 81-043 Clark v Ryan (1960) 103 CLR 486 Commissioner of Railways v Ruprecht (1979) 142 CLR 563 Electric Power Transmission Pty Ltd v Orgaz, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 7914; 3 November 1989 Mason v Williams & Williams Ltd & Anor (1955) 1 All ER 808 McLean v Tedman (1984) 155 CLR 306 Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission (1995) 182 CLR 1 Nair v Health Administration Corporation & Anor (1994) A Tort Rep 81312 Podrebersek v Australian Iron & Steel Pty Ltd (1985) 59 ALJR 492 Rae v Broken Hill Pty Co Ltd (1957) 97 CLR 419 Raimondo v State of South Australia (1979) 23 ALR 513 Sungravure Pty Ltd v Meanie (1964) 110 CLR 24 Ta v Lucky Import & Export Co Pty Ltd [2002] WASCA 65 Thomas v O'Shea (1989) A Tort Rep 81-251 Vozza v Tooth & Co Ltd (1964) 112 CLR 316 Wade v Allsopp (1976) 10 ALR 353 Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE FULL COURT (WA) CITATION : EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY -v- CZATRYKO [2002] WASCA 334 CORAM : WALLWORK J

MURRAY J

TEMPLEMAN J

HEARD : 18 JUNE 2002 DELIVERED : 9 DECEMBER 2002 FILE NO/S : FUL 126 of 2001 BETWEEN : EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY

Appellant

AND

BRETT GEORGE JERZY CZATRYKO

Respondent

Catchwords:

Negligence - Personal injuries - Worker loading truck fell off - Stepped back thinking hoist was raised - Hoist was being lowered - No breach of duty of care to fail to warn worker

Legislation:

Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 (WA), s 19

Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA), s 5

(Page 2)

Result:

Appeal allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : Ms B A Mangan

Respondent : Mr B G Bradley

Solicitors:

Appellant : Phillips Fox

Respondent : Leonard Cohen & Co

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Chappel v Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232
Nagle v Rottnest Island…

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 Edith Cowan University v Czatryko 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: [2002] WASCA 334
Decision Date: 9 DECEMBER 2002

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Edith Cowan University was involved in a legal dispute with its employee, Mr Czatryko. The employee suffered personal injuries when a hoist he was using to load a truck fell off, causing him to step back and fall. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of Western Australia, where the university sought to overturn a previous decision that found it negligent in failing to warn the employee that the hoist was being lowered.

The primary legal issue in the case was whether the university had a duty of care to warn the employee that the hoist was being lowered, which would have resulted in the employee being found negligent for stepping back and falling. The Court of Appeal needed to determine whether the university breached its duty of care by not warning the employee of the lowering hoist. The university argued that it had no such duty of care, while the employee contended that the university should have taken reasonable steps to ensure his safety while using the hoist.

The Court of Appeal found that the university did not breach its duty of care by failing to warn the employee that the hoist was being lowered. The court held that the employee was responsible for monitoring the hoist and taking appropriate action when it was being lowered. The court found that the university had taken reasonable steps to ensure the employee's safety, including providing training on the use of the hoist and warning signs. The Court of Appeal concluded that the employee's actions, rather than the university's failure to warn, caused the accident, and thus the university was not negligent in failing to warn the employee of the lowering hoist.

As a result of the Court of Appeal's decision, the appeal was allowed, and the previous decision finding the university negligent was overturned. The Court of Appeal found in favour of the university and dismissed the employee's claim for damages.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal allowed

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.