Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW v Jackson

The parties to this appeal were the Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW (the Authority) and Mr Jackson. The dispute concerned the Authority's alleged liability in negligence for injuries sustained by Mr Jackson when he fell from a pedestrian guard rail. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Authority owed a duty of care to pedestrians, such as Mr Jackson, in relation to the design and maintenance of a pedestrian guard rail, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the court considered whether a change in the height of the guard rail constituted a concealed hazard or trap, and whether the risk of a pedestrian falling from it was reasonably foreseeable.

The Court of Appeal found that the risk of a pedestrian falling from the guard rail was not reasonably foreseeable, nor was it a far-fetched or fanciful risk. The court reasoned that the guard rail, as constructed, did not present a concealed hazard or trap. The height of the guard rail was not such that it created an unreasonable risk of injury to a pedestrian using it in the ordinary way. Consequently, the Authority had not breached any duty of care owed to Mr Jackson.

The Court of Appeal allowed the Authority's appeal, setting aside the verdict and judgment previously entered in favour of Mr Jackson at first instance. The court ordered that a verdict be entered for the defendant, the Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW, with costs.