Jones v Bartlett

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the appellant, who had been injured when he walked into a glass door at a rented property. The appellant's parents were the tenants, and he resided with them. The respondents were the owners of the property. The appellant's claim for damages for negligence was dismissed by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia, overturning a decision at first instance that had found in favour of the appellant, albeit with a fifty per cent reduction for contributory negligence.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the landlords owed a duty of care to a person lawfully on the premises, specifically a resident, regarding the state of the premises. This included whether the landlords had a duty to have the premises inspected by an expert to assess the safety of the glass in a door and to replace it with glass that complied with current Australian Standards, even though the original installation complied with the standards at the time of construction. The court also considered whether a breach of the tenancy agreement, as implied by the Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (WA) and potentially s 11 of the Property Law Act 1969 (WA), could give rise to a cause of action for the appellant as a third party, and whether the landlords were "occupiers" under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA).

The High Court ultimately dismissed the appeal. The majority reasoned that the landlords' duty of care did not extend to inspecting the premises for compliance with subsequent changes in Australian Standards for glass safety, particularly when the original installation met the standards applicable at the time of construction. The court found no contractual or statutory basis to impose such a retrospective duty on the landlords. Furthermore, the court determined that the landlords were not "occupiers" for the purposes of the Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA) in relation to the specific hazard.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.