Ellis v. Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (Q)

In the case of Ellis v. Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust, the appellant, Ms. Ellis, brought an action against the respondent, the Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust, following an incident in which she slipped and fell on a brick paved driveway that crossed a public footpath outside the respondent's premises. The appellant alleged that the respondent had breached a duty of care it owed to her, which resulted in her injuries. The primary issue before the court was whether the respondent owed the appellant a duty of care more demanding than that of an occupier to entrants of ordinary residential premises or that of a local authority to users of public roads and footpaths. The court also had to consider the trial judge's findings on the degree and obviousness of the risk, which was evidenced by the appellant tripping on a paver which protruded less than 3cm.

The court found that the respondent did not owe the appellant a duty of care more demanding than that of an occupier to entrants of ordinary residential premises. The court held that the relationship between the parties was not akin to that between an occupier and an entrant, nor did it resemble the relationship between a local authority and users of public roads and footpaths. The court further found that the risk of tripping on the uneven paver was obvious and that the trial judge's findings on the degree and obviousness of the risk were open on the evidence. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and costs were to be assessed on the standard basis.