Gordon v Perignon

In the case of Gordon v Perignon, the plaintiff, Gordon, brought an action against Perignon, the owner of a unit in an apartment block, following an incident where Gordon’s child fell from an open window in a bedroom. Gordon contended that the fall was caused by a defective flyscreen, alleging that the owner and the body corporate had failed to provide a safe environment. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether Perignon owed a duty of care to ensure the flyscreen was safe, and if so, whether the alleged defect in the flyscreen was the cause of the child's fall. Additionally, the court considered whether the body corporate was also liable for failing to maintain or inspect the flyscreen properly.

The court examined the principles of negligence and the specific duties of care applicable to residential property owners and body corporates. It was determined that both Perignon and the body corporate owed a duty of care to residents to ensure that common areas and facilities, such as windows and flyscreens, were safe. However, the court found that the evidence did not establish that the flyscreen was defective or that its condition directly caused the child to fall. Instead, the court concluded that the fall was a result of the child's own actions in opening the window and climbing onto the sill. Therefore, the court dismissed Gordon's claim against both Perignon and the body corporate.

The court ordered that Gordon pay Perignon's and the body corporate's costs of the proceeding.