Legal Research
Cases
J-Corp Pty Ltd v Thompson

J-Corp Pty Ltd v Thompson

Case [2019] WASCA 173 7 November 2019

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TITLE OF COURT :   THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
CITATION:   J-CORP PTY LTD -v- THOMPSON [2019] WASCA 173
CORAM:   MURPHY JA
MITCHELL JA
VAUGHAN JA

HEARD:   4 OCTOBER 2019
DELIVERED          :   7 NOVEMBER 2019
FILE NO/S:   CACV 117 of 2018
BETWEEN:   J-CORP PTY LTD
Appellant
AND
ALEX PAUL THOMPSON
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   BOWDEN DCJ
Citation: THOMPSON -v- J-CORP PTY LTD [2018] WADC 164
File Number             :   CIV 3080 of 2016

Catchwords:

Negligence - Occupiers' liability - Whether breach of duty of care owed by building contractor to subcontractors was established - Where roof carpenter injured when brick pier collapsed as he stepped off it - Where brickwork not constructed according to structural engineer's specification - Whether a reasonable person in the builder's position would have inspected the brickwork for adherence to structural specification before allowing roof carpenters to work on site - Need to assess breach of duty prospectively

Legislation:

Civil Liability Act 2002 (WA), s 5B
Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA), s 5

Result:

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	Mr G R Hancy
Respondent	:	Mr T Lampropoulos SC & Mr D M Bruns

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Greenland Legal Pty Ltd
Respondent	:	Stephen Browne Lawyers

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Adeels Palace Pty Ltd v Moubarak [2009] HCA 48; (2009) 239 CLR 420
Alinta Gas Networks Pty Ltd v James [2007] WASCA 155
Apostolic Church Australia Ltd v Dixon [2018] WASCA 146
CGU Insurance Ltd v Coote [2018] WASCA 117
Davies v Tomkins [2009] WASCA 228
Department of Housing and Works v Smith [No 2] [2010] WASCA 25; (2010) 41 WAR 217
Fitzpatrick v Job [2007] WASCA 63
Hanna-Pauley v AMP Shopping Centres Pty Ltd [2007] WASCA 174
Jasmina Investments Pty Ltd v Vlahos [2009] WASCA 190
Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v Fox [2009] HCA 35; (2009) 240 CLR 1
New South Wales v Fahy [2007] HCA 20; (2007) 232 CLR 486
Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW v Dederer [2007] HCA 42; (2007) 234 CLR 330
Shire of Toodyay v Walton [2007] WASCA 76
Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 16
Taylor v Fisher [2018] WASCA 126
The Quadriplegic Centre Board of Management v McMurtrie [2009] WASCA 173
Vairy v Wyong Shire Council [2005] HCA 62; (2005) 223 CLR 422
Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:

Summary

The respondent (Mr Thompson) was a roof carpenter working for roofing subcontractors engaged by the appellant (J‑Corp) to assist in the construction of a house in Bullsbrook. Mr Thompson was injured when an isolated brick column, or pier, collapsed as he stepped off it. We shall refer to the collapsed pier as the pier in these reasons.
The pier had been built by bricklaying subcontractors engaged by J‑Corp, but had not been constructed according to structural engineering specifications. Drawings…

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.

Continue reading J-Corp Pty Ltd v Thompson

Details

AGLC: J-Corp Pty Ltd v Thompson [2019] WASCA 173
Case: [2019] WASCA 173
Decision Date: 7 NOVEMBER 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of J-Corp Pty Ltd v Thompson involved a dispute concerning the duty of care owed by a building contractor to its subcontractors. The plaintiff, a roof carpenter, was injured when a brick pier collapsed as he stepped off it. The carpenter alleged that the injury occurred because the brickwork was not constructed in accordance with the specifications provided by a structural engineer. The court was required to determine whether the contractor breached its duty of care by failing to inspect the brickwork to ensure it adhered to the structural specifications before allowing the roof carpenters to work on the site. The carpenter argued that a reasonable person in the contractor's position would have inspected the brickwork. The contractor contended that such an inspection was not necessary.

The central legal issue before the court was whether a reasonable person in the contractor's position would have inspected the brickwork for adherence to the structural specification before allowing the roof carpenters to work on site. The court considered whether the contractor owed a duty of care to the roof carpenter and, if so, whether that duty was breached. The court assessed the foreseeability of the risk and the steps that a reasonable person in the contractor's position would have taken to mitigate that risk. The court also considered the need to assess the breach of duty prospectively, meaning based on what a reasonable person would have done at the time of the incident, rather than in hindsight.

The court found that a reasonable person in the contractor's position would have inspected the brickwork to ensure it adhered to the structural specification before allowing the roof carpenters to work on site. The court held that the contractor breached its duty of care by failing to take this step. The court emphasised the importance of inspecting critical structural elements of a building to ensure they are constructed according to specifications, especially when subcontractors are working on site. The court concluded that the contractor's failure to inspect the brickwork constituted a breach of the duty of care owed to the roof carpenter.

The court ordered that the contractor pay damages to the roof carpenter for his injuries. The court found that the contractor was liable for the full amount of the carpenter's damages, as the carpenter's injury was a direct result of the contractor's breach of duty. The court also noted that the contractor's failure to inspect the brickwork was a significant factor in the carpenter's injury, and that the contractor should have taken steps to ensure that the brickwork was constructed in accordance with the structural specification. The court's decision highlights the importance of contractors taking appropriate steps to ensure the safety of their subcontractors on site.

Orders