Redland City Council v Kozic & Ors

The High Court of Australia considered a dispute between Redland City Council and Mr Kozic and other respondents concerning the Council's liability for injuries sustained by Mr Kozic when he fell from a bicycle on a shared pathway. The pathway was maintained by the Council, and the fall occurred due to a raised section of bitumen. Mr Kozic alleged negligence on the part of the Council in failing to maintain the pathway in a safe condition.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Council owed a duty of care to Mr Kozic in relation to the condition of the shared pathway, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the Council's knowledge of the defect, or constructive knowledge, was sufficient to establish a breach of its duty to maintain the pathway in a reasonably safe condition for users.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, affirmed that a local council owes a duty of care to maintain public roads and pathways under its control in a reasonably safe condition. The Court held that the Council had constructive knowledge of the defect because the defect had existed for a significant period, and there was evidence that council employees had observed the defect. This prolonged existence and observation meant the Council ought to have known of the danger. The Court applied the principles of negligence, focusing on the foreseeability of harm and the reasonableness of the steps taken (or not taken) by the Council to prevent it. The Court found that the Council had breached its duty of care.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and remitting the matter to the Court of Appeal for determination of the quantum of damages.