Hrybynyuk v Mazur

The appellant, Hrybynyuk, brought proceedings in negligence against the respondent, Mazur, following an incident where the appellant fell from the roof of a building. The dispute concerned whether the respondent owed a duty of care to the appellant and, if so, whether that duty had been breached. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the respondent, as a member of the committee of an unincorporated association, owed a duty of care to another member of that association, and whether the respondent had breached any such duty. Specifically, the court considered whether the respondent was negligent in failing to ensure the safety of the roof or in failing to supervise the appellant's actions.

The Court of Appeal held that, as a general principle, a member of an unincorporated association does not owe a duty of care to another member solely by virtue of their membership. Membership of the association's committee did not, in itself, create a duty of care. Any duty of care had to be established on ordinary principles of negligence, considering the specific circumstances. The court found no evidence that a reasonable building inspection would have detected the fault in the roof that caused the appellant's fall. Furthermore, there was no evidence that a person with appropriate supervisory skills would have instructed the appellant not to climb the roof. Consequently, no breach of duty was established.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.