Miller v Paua Nominees Pty Ltd

The case of Miller v Paua Nominees Pty Ltd involved an action for damages in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The plaintiff, Miller, was a worker employed to re-clad an aircraft. While on the job, Miller was injured when he jumped from scaffolding onto the top of the aircraft. He sued the respondent, Paua Nominees Pty Ltd, for negligence, arguing that the company was negligent in failing to provide a safe means of accessing the aircraft.

The central issue before the court was whether the respondent scaffolder owed a duty of care to the plaintiff in respect of the incident which led to his injuries. The court needed to determine whether the respondent ought to have known that there was no safe access to the top of the aircraft and whether it was reasonably foreseeable that workers would injure themselves in attempting to access the top of the aircraft. If so, the court had to decide whether the respondent owed those engaged in the re-cladding work a duty of care to ensure that a safe means of effecting that work was provided.

The court found that the respondent owed the plaintiff a duty of care. It held that the respondent ought to have known that there was no safe access to the top of the aircraft. It was also reasonably foreseeable that workers would injure themselves in attempting to access the top of the aircraft. As a result, the respondent owed those engaged in the re-cladding work a duty of care to ensure that a safe means of effecting that work was provided. The court found that the respondent was negligent in failing to provide a safe means of accessing the top of the aircraft, and that the plaintiff's injuries were caused by that negligence. The appeal was dismissed.