Lynn v Apex Holiday Centre (Incorporated) - [2003] WADC 169

LYNN -v- APEX HOLIDAY CENTRE (INCORPORATED) [2003] WADC 169

Last Update: 13/08/2003

LYNN -v- APEX HOLIDAY CENTRE (INCORPORATED) [2003] WADC 169
Link to Appeal:	[2005] WASCA 58
Jurisdiction:	DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2003] WADC 169
Case No:	CIV:896/2001	Heard:	25-27 NOVEMBER 2002
Coram:	COMMISSIONER GILES	Delivered:	08/08/2003
Location:	PERTH	Supplementary Decision:
No of Pages:	28	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Liability upheld Damages awarded
[Click here for Judgment in Adobe Acrobat Format ]

Parties:	DAWN ROSEANNE LYNN APEX HOLIDAY CENTRE (INCORPORATED)
Catchwords:	Negligence Occupier's liability Scope of duty owed by voluntary organisation providing low cost holiday accommodation Assessment of damages
Legislation:	Occupiers' Liability Act 1985
Case References:	Gondoline Pty Ltd v Hansford [2002] WADC 214 Jones v Bartlett (2000) 205 CLR 166 Podrebersek v Australian Iron and Steel Pty Ltd (1985) 59 ALR 529 Romeo v Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory (1998) 192 CLR 431 Stannus v Graham (1994) A Tort Rep 81-297 Uzabeaga v Town of Cottesloe [2002] WADC 71 Wilkinson v Law Courts Ltd [2001] NSWCA 196 Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479 Brodie v Singleton Shire Council (2001) 206 CLR 512 Bryant v Fawdon Pty Ltd (1993) A Tort Rep 81-204 Burwood Council v Byrnes [2002] NSWCA 343 Commissioner for Railways (NSW) v Anderson (1961) 105 CLR 42 Commissioner for Railways v Ruprecht (1979) 142 CLR 563 Hackshaw v Shaw (1984) 155 CLR 614 Lawson v Charles Hull Contraction Pty Ltd (1997) 20 SR (WA) 174 Lipman v Clendinnen (1932) 46 CLR 550 McHale v Watson (1996) 115 CLR 199 Nance v British Columbia Electric Railway Company Ltd [1951] AC 601 Pennington v Norris (1956) 96 CLR 10 Richmond Valley Council v Standing (2002) A Tort Rep 81-679 Roman Catholic Archbishop of Perth v Hinchcliffe, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 980520; 14 September 1998 Rootes v Shelton (1967) 116 CLR 383 State Government Insurance Commission v Hitchcock, unreported; FCt SCt of WA Library No 970089; 11 March 1997 The Commonwealth of Australia v O'Callaghan [2001] WASCA 276 The Council of the Shire of Wyong v Shirt & Ors (1980) 146 CLR 40 Insurance Commissioner v Joyce (1948) 77 CLR 39

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : LYNN -v- APEX HOLIDAY CENTRE (INCORPORATED) [2003] WADC 169 CORAM : COMMISSIONER GILES HEARD : 25-27 NOVEMBER 2002 DELIVERED : 8 AUGUST 2003 FILE NO/S : CIV 896 of 2001 BETWEEN : DAWN ROSEANNE LYNN

Plaintiff

AND

APEX HOLIDAY CENTRE (INCORPORATED)

Defendant

Catchwords:

Negligence - Occupier's liability - Scope of duty owed by voluntary organisation providing low cost holiday accommodation - Assessment of damages

Legislation:

Occupiers' Liability Act 1985

Result:

Liability upheld
Damages awarded

(Page 2)

Representation:

Counsel:

Plaintiff : Mr B G Bradley

Defendant : Mr P E Jarman

Solicitors:

Plaintiff : Bradley & Bayly

Defendant : Jackson McDonald

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

Gondoline Pty Ltd v Hansford [2002] WADC 214
Jones v Bartlett (2000) 205 CLR 166
Podrebersek…

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 Lynn v Apex Holiday Centre (Incorporated) 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: [2003] WADC 169
Decision Date: 8 AUGUST 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Lynn v Apex Holiday Centre (Incorporated) involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Ms Lynn, and the defendant, Apex Holiday Centre, a voluntary organisation providing low-cost holiday accommodation. Ms Lynn alleged that she had suffered injuries at the holiday centre due to the defendant's negligence. The legal issue before the court was to determine the scope of the duty of care owed by the defendant, as a voluntary organisation, to its guests, and to assess the damages to be awarded to Ms Lynn.

The court was required to consider whether the defendant owed a duty of care to Ms Lynn as an invitee, and if so, whether this duty had been breached, leading to her injuries. Additionally, the court needed to determine the appropriate measure of damages to be awarded to Ms Lynn for her injuries. The court considered the principles of occupiers' liability, particularly focusing on the nature of the defendant's role as a voluntary organisation and the standard of care expected under such circumstances.

In reaching its decision, the court held that the defendant, as an occupier providing accommodation, did owe a duty of care to Ms Lynn as a guest. The court found that the defendant had breached this duty by failing to maintain a safe environment, leading to Ms Lynn's injuries. The court assessed the damages based on the extent of Ms Lynn's injuries and the impact on her life, ultimately awarding her compensation. The court's decision upheld the liability of the defendant and granted the plaintiff the damages she sought.

Orders

Orders of the court

Liability upheld

Damages awarded

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.