Negligence - Fatal plane crash after engine failure - Duty of care of pilot - Standard of care in emergency
Negligence - Engine failure due to negligence of engineer - Apportionment of liability between pilot and engineer
Negligence - Pure economic loss - Whether common law action for loss of services - Rule in Baker v Bolton - Whether common law claim for death of employees
Negligence - Whether duty to prevent pure economic loss - No direct commercial relationship - Vulnerability
Trade practices - Whether implied warranties in s 74 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) excluded - Whether charter contract 'in relation to the transportation or storage of goods for the purposes of a business' - Predominant purpose of contract
Trade practices - Whether breach of implied warranties in s 74 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) - Whether services and materials provided with due care and skill
[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.
Continue reading Fugro Spatial Solutions Pty Ltd v Cifuentes
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Fugro Spatial Solutions Pty Ltd v Cifuentes [2011] WASCA 102
Case
[2011] WASCA 102
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Fugro Spatial Solutions Pty Ltd, a company engaged in hydrographic surveying, brought an action against Cifuentes, the pilot of a plane that crashed, resulting in the death of several employees of Fugro. The company claimed damages for the loss of services of the deceased employees, the death of the employees, and a breach of implied warranties under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). The court was required to decide several issues, including whether there was a duty of care owed by the pilot to the deceased employees, whether a common law action for loss of services or death existed, and whether the implied warranties in s 74 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) were excluded.
The court found that the pilot owed a duty of care to the deceased employees, but the standard of care required in an emergency was lower than in normal circumstances. The court held that the engineer's negligence caused the engine failure, which led to the crash, and apportioned liability between the pilot and the engineer. The court found that there was no common law action for loss of services or death, but held that the engineer's negligence gave rise to a cause of action under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). The court held that the implied warranties in s 74 of the Act were not excluded and that the services and materials provided by the engineer were not provided with due care and skill.
The court awarded damages to Fugro for the loss of services of the deceased employees, the death of the employees, and the breach of implied warranties. The court also made orders for contribution between the pilot and the engineer, which were not contrary to s 7 of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence and Tortfeasors' Contribution) Act 1947 (WA). The court held that the original orders for damages reflected the apportionment of liability between the pilot and the engineer.