Northern Sandblasting Pty Ltd v Harris

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland concerning a claim for personal injury. The appellant, Northern Sandblasting Pty Ltd, was the landlord of residential premises, and the respondent, Harris, was the child of the tenants. The child suffered injuries due to electrical faults within the leased premises. The central dispute revolved around the extent of the landlord's duty of care to the tenants' child.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the landlord owed a duty of care to the tenant's child in respect of defects in the leased premises, particularly those arising from electrical faults. The court was required to determine the nature and scope of this duty, considering principles of proximity, assumption of responsibility, control, and vulnerability. Furthermore, the court had to examine whether the landlord was under a non-delegable duty to ensure the premises were safe for habitation and whether statutory obligations imposed by the *Property Law Act 1974* (Q) and the *Residential Tenancies Act 1975* (Q) created contractual obligations between the landlord and tenant, and if a third party, such as the tenant's child, could sue for breach of these statutory duties.

The High Court, by majority, held that a landlord owes a duty of care to the tenants and their family to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm arising from defects in the premises that are not discoverable by the tenant through reasonable inspection. This duty extends to latent defects, particularly those requiring specialised knowledge to identify, such as electrical faults. The court found that the landlord retained a sufficient degree of control over the premises and that the tenant's child was vulnerable to the risks posed by the electrical defects. The statutory obligations under the *Property Law Act 1974* (Q) and the *Residential Tenancies Act 1975* (Q) were interpreted as imposing duties on the landlord that could found a cause of action for breach, even by a third party, where the landlord failed to maintain the premises in a condition fit for human habitation.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.