SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Green v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd [2007]
QCA 260PARTIES:
MARGARET GREEN
(plaintiff/respondent)
v
HANSON CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PTY LTD (ACN 009 679 734)
(defendant/appellant)FILE NO/S:
Appeal No 532 of 2007
DC No 2865 of 2004DIVISION:
Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:
General Civil Appeal
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:
10 August 2007
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
12 June 2007
JUDGES:
Jerrard JA, White and Atkinson JJ
Judgment of the CourtORDER:
1. Appeal allowed
2. Reduce damages awarded by 30 per cent to $103,358.22
3. Respondent to pay two thirds of the appellant’s costs of the appeal assessed on the standard basisCATCHWORDS:
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – ESSENTIALS OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE – STANDARD OF CARE – PARTICULAR PERSONS AND SITUATIONS – OTHER CASES – where the plaintiff was a courier – where the plaintiff injured her shoulder when she fell down the defendant’s stairs while making a delivery – whether the defendant had breached its duty of care to the plaintiff
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE – PARTICULAR CASES – OTHER CASES – where the plaintiff had failed to hold on to the handrail when using the stairs – whether the failure amounted to contributory negligence
DAMAGES – PARTICULAR AWARDS OF GENERAL DAMAGES – QUEENSLAND – whether the trial judge’s calculation of damages was correct
Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 9(1)(a), s 9(1)(b)
Law Reform Act 1995 (Qld), s 10(1)Hoekstra v Residual Assco Industries Pty Ltd [2004] NSWSC 564, applied
McLean v Tedman (1984) 155 CLR 306, applied
New South Wales v Fahy [2007] HCA 20, applied
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40, appliedCOUNSEL:
R Morgan for the appellant
S Williams QC, with J Kimmins, for the respondentSOLICITORS:
HBM Lawyers for the appellant
Maurice Blackburn Cashman for the respondent
THE COURT: This appeal is against a decision in the District Court delivered on 18 January 2007 in which the learned trial judge gave judgment for the plaintiff respondent in the sum of $147,654.61 against the defendant appellant, on the plaintiff’s claim for personal injury. The learned judge also ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff’s costs of and incidental to the action assessed on an indemnity basis. The appellant challenged the finding that it had breached a duty of care to the plaintiff, the quantum ordered for damages by way of future economic loss, and the failure to find that the plaintiff should have her damages reduced by reason of her failure to take reasonable care for her own safety in the incident resulting in personal injury.
The slip
The incident causing the plaintiff injury to her right shoulder happened at approximately 6.35 am on 1 May 2003, when the 56 year old plaintiff was delivering mail and other items to the defendant’s office at its Coopers Plains concrete batching plant. The plaintiff was a self employed courier, who had been making daily delivery to that office…
Continue reading Green v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Green v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd [2007] QCA 260
- Case
- [2007] QCA 260
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and whether it had breached that duty by not providing adequate handrails. The court found that the defendant did owe a duty of care to the plaintiff as an invitee on its premises. The court also concluded that the defendant had breached this duty by not providing adequate handrails, which would have facilitated safe use of the stairs by the plaintiff. In relation to contributory negligence, the court determined that the plaintiff's failure to hold onto the handrail did contribute to her injury, but did not absolve the defendant of liability.
The court's reasoning led to the conclusion that the damages awarded to the plaintiff were excessive. The trial judge had awarded the plaintiff $147,654.60, but the appeal court found that this amount was not appropriate given the plaintiff's contributory negligence. The court reduced the damages to $103,358.22, reflecting a 30 per cent reduction. The court further ordered that the defendant pay two thirds of the plaintiff's costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Appeal allowed
2. Reduce damages awarded by 30 per cent to $103,358.22
3. Respondent to pay two thirds of the appellant’s costs of the appeal assessed on the standard basis
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.