Felk Industries Pty Ltd v Mallet

Felk Industries Pty Ltd (Felk) was the defendant in proceedings brought by Mr Mallett, a subcontractor's employee. Mr Mallett sustained an injury while performing specialised services on premises occupied by Felk. The trial judge had found both Felk and Mr Mallett's employer liable for the injury.

The central legal issues before the court were whether Felk, as occupier, owed a duty of care to Mr Mallett in relation to the obstruction that impeded his work, and whether Felk breached that duty. The court also considered whether the injury was caused solely by Mr Mallett undertaking a procedure that, unknown to him due to his employer's negligence, involved a risk of injury. Finally, the court had to determine if a "Bullock" order was appropriate in favour of the plaintiff.

The court held that Felk, as occupier, did not owe a duty of care to Mr Mallett in relation to the obstruction, as it was readily visible. Furthermore, the court found that the lifting injury was caused solely by Mr Mallett's own actions in undertaking a procedure that, unbeknownst to him due to his employer's negligence, carried an inherent risk of injury. Consequently, the court determined that a "Bullock" order was not appropriate.