Preston v Star City Pty Limited (No 3)

In Preston v Star City Pty Limited (No 3), the plaintiff sought to challenge a strike-out application lodged by the defendant casino against his statement of claim. The dispute centred on the casino's alleged failure to provide a duty of care to the plaintiff, a patron with known vulnerabilities, and whether the casino's alleged deliberate conduct constituted negligence. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was tasked with determining whether the plaintiff's statement of claim was legally sufficient and internally consistent, particularly in light of the casino's argument that the plaintiff's claims were inconsistent with the notion of vicarious liability. The court also needed to assess whether the casino owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, given his known weaknesses, and whether the casino's actions could be construed as deliberate conduct amounting to negligence.

The court held that the plaintiff's statement of claim was internally inconsistent, particularly in relation to the casino's alleged vicarious liability. The court found that the plaintiff had failed to adequately plead the necessary elements of vicarious liability, and that the claims of deliberate conduct were not supported by the facts pleaded. The court further held that the casino owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, but that this duty was not breached by the casino's alleged actions. The court dismissed the plaintiff's claims and struck out his statement of claim.

The court ordered that the plaintiff's statement of claim be struck out in its entirety and that the defendant be entitled to its costs of the application. The court also noted that the plaintiff had leave to amend his statement of claim, subject to certain conditions being met.