Ireland v B and M Outboard Repairs - [2015] QSC 84

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:
Ireland v B & M Outboard Repairs [2015] QSC 84

PARTIES:
COLIN LEO IRELAND
(Plaintiff)

v

ROBERT JOHN HASLETT AND MARGARET ANN HASLETT AND CRAIG GEOFFREY HASLETT TRADING AS B&M OUTBOARD REPAIRS (ABN 21795 821 987
(Defendants)

FILE NO:
S235/2009

DIVISION:
Trial

PROCEEDING:
Trial

ORIGINATING COURT:
Townsville

HEARING DATES:
31 March 2014, 1 to 4 April 2014, 12, 13 June 2014,
22 August 2014, last submissions received 1 September 2014

DELIVERED ON:
8 April 2015

DELIVERED AT: Townsville

JUDGE:
North J

ORDERS:
Judgement for the plaintiff against the defendants in the amount of $703,721.90.

CATCHWORDS:
TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – BREACH OF IMPLIED TERM RELATING TO CONTRACT FOR PROVISION OF SERVICES – WHETHER CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2003 HAS APPLICATION – DUTY OF CARE – BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE AND BREACH OF IMPLIED TERM – CAUSATION – SCOPE OF LIABILITY – PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESS – ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES – VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION OF RISK – OBVIOUS RISK – DUTY TO WARN – DANGEROUS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.

LEGISLATION:
Civil Liability Act 2003

Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)

CASES:
Astley v Austrust Ltd (1999) 179 CLR 1
BP Refinery (Western Port) Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings (1977) 180 CLR
Byrne v Australian Airlines Pty Ltd (1995) 185 CLR 410
Chand v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2014] NSWSC 708
Cooper & Ors v Australian Electric Co (1922) 25 WALR 66.
Hawkins v Clayton (1988) 164 CLR 539
Helicopter Sales (Australia) Pty Ltd v Rotor Work Pty Ltd (1974) 132 CLR 1.
Hudson Investment Group Ltd v Atanaskovic [2014] NSW CA 255
Nair-Smith v Perisher Blue Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 727
Pennington v Norris (1956) 96 CLR 10

Rogers v Whittaker (1992) 175 CLR 479

Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434.

Wallace v Cam (2013) 87 ALJR 648
Zorba Structural Steel Company Pty Ltd v Watco Pty Ltd (1993) 115 FLR 206

COUNSEL:
G F Crow QC with V Keegan for the Plaintiff
M T O’Sullivan for the Defendants

SOLICITORS: Macrossan and Amiet for the Plaintiff
Sparke Helmore for the Defendants

Introduction

Early in the morning of 10 April 2006 the plaintiff launched his Haines Hunter outboard boat at a boat ramp at Oyster Point at Port Hinchinbrook. He then engaged the ignition to start the outboard motor after which a fire broke out which severely damaged the boat. He claims that as a consequence of the fire he suffered personal injury including a debilitating psychiatric illness. The defendants were partners in a business that included the maintenance, repair and modification of outboard marine engines and ancillary parts who had, in September 2004, replaced the fuel lines of the boat and installed an electric fuel pump. The plaintiff claims that the fire on the boat and his consequential injury were caused by a breach of contract by the defendants and a breach of a duty of care owed by them to exercise reasonable skill and care in the performance of the work, including the advice given…

Grounds of appeal

[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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Ireland v B and M Outboard Repairs and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2015] QSC 84
Decision Date: 8 April 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Ireland v B and M Outboard Repairs involved the plaintiff, Ireland, who brought a claim against the defendants, B and M Outboard Repairs, for negligence and breach of an implied term relating to a contract for the provision of services. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants' negligence and breach of contract led to his injuries and subsequent psychiatric illness. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issues in the case were whether the Civil Liability Act 2003 applied to the breach of an implied term relating to the contract for the provision of services, the existence and scope of a duty of care owed by the defendants to the plaintiff, whether there was a breach of that duty of care and/or the implied term, causation, the plaintiff's psychiatric illness, and the assessment of damages. Additionally, the court considered whether the plaintiff had voluntarily assumed the risk of injury, whether the risk was obvious, and whether the defendants had a duty to warn the plaintiff of the risk.

The court found that the Civil Liability Act 2003 did apply to the breach of the implied term and that the defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff. The court determined that the defendants breached this duty of care and the implied term, which caused the plaintiff's injuries and psychiatric illness. The court also found that the plaintiff had voluntarily assumed the risk, but it was not obvious, and therefore the defendants did have a duty to warn the plaintiff of the risk. Finally, the court assessed the damages and awarded the plaintiff $703,721.90.

The court ordered that judgment be entered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendants in the amount of $703,721.90, which included compensation for the plaintiff's injuries, psychiatric illness, and loss of earnings.

Orders

Orders of the court

Judgement for the plaintiff against the defendants in the amount of $703,721.90.

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.

CITATION:	Ireland v B & M Outboard Repairs [2015] QSC 84
PARTIES:	COLIN LEO IRELAND (Plaintiff) v ROBERT JOHN HASLETT AND MARGARET ANN HASLETT AND CRAIG GEOFFREY HASLETT TRADING AS B&M OUTBOARD REPAIRS (ABN 21795 821 987 (Defendants)
FILE NO:	S235/2009
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Trial
ORIGINATING COURT:	Townsville
HEARING DATES:	31 March 2014, 1 to 4 April 2014, 12, 13 June 2014, 22 August 2014, last submissions received 1 September 2014
DELIVERED ON:	8 April 2015
DELIVERED AT:	Townsville
JUDGE:	North J
ORDERS:	Judgement for the plaintiff against the defendants in the amount of $703,721.90.
CATCHWORDS:	TORTS – NEGLIGENCE – BREACH OF IMPLIED TERM RELATING TO CONTRACT FOR PROVISION OF SERVICES – WHETHER CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 2003 HAS APPLICATION – DUTY OF CARE – BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE AND BREACH OF IMPLIED TERM – CAUSATION – SCOPE OF LIABILITY – PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESS – ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES – VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION OF RISK – OBVIOUS RISK – DUTY TO WARN – DANGEROUS RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY – CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.
LEGISLATION:	Civil Liability Act 2003 Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)
CASES:	Astley v Austrust Ltd (1999) 179 CLR 1 BP Refinery (Western Port) Pty Ltd v Shire of Hastings (1977) 180 CLR Byrne v Australian Airlines Pty Ltd (1995) 185 CLR 410 Chand v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2014] NSWSC 708 Cooper & Ors v Australian Electric Co (1922) 25 WALR 66. Hawkins v Clayton (1988) 164 CLR 539 Helicopter Sales (Australia) Pty Ltd v Rotor Work Pty Ltd (1974) 132 CLR 1. Hudson Investment Group Ltd v Atanaskovic [2014] NSW CA 255 Nair-Smith v Perisher Blue Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 727 Pennington v Norris (1956) 96 CLR 10 Rogers v Whittaker (1992) 175 CLR 479 Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434. Wallace v Cam (2013) 87 ALJR 648 Zorba Structural Steel Company Pty Ltd v Watco Pty Ltd (1993) 115 FLR 206
COUNSEL:	G F Crow QC with V Keegan for the Plaintiff M T O’Sullivan for the Defendants
SOLICITORS:	Macrossan and Amiet for the Plaintiff Sparke Helmore for the Defendants