Robinson Helicopter Co Inc v McDermott

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from the Court of Appeal of Queensland concerning a negligence claim brought by Mr McDermott against Robinson Helicopter Co Inc. Mr McDermott suffered serious injuries when a helicopter manufactured by the appellant crashed due to a defect in its forward flex plate. The defect, which involved an incorrectly assembled and insufficiently tightened bolt, was not caused by Robinson but arose during reassembly by a third party. The helicopter had undergone multiple routine inspections, including two "100 hourly" inspections and pre-flight checks, after the defect occurred but before the crash, yet the defect remained undetected.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether Robinson breached its duty of care to Mr McDermott, and if so, whether that breach caused his injuries. Specifically, the court had to determine if Robinson's maintenance manual provided sufficient instructions to enable the detection of the defect during routine inspections. Furthermore, the court considered whether the majority of the Court of Appeal had erred in overturning the primary judge's findings of fact and in their assessment of causation, particularly in relation to the possibility of multiple causes for the damage.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the majority of the Court of Appeal had erred in their interpretation of the evidence and in their assessment of causation. The primary judge had found that the maintenance manual's instructions regarding torque stripes were sufficient to alert a competent mechanic to the potential for bolt rotation if the stripe was missing, damaged, or incomplete. The High Court agreed with the primary judge that the evidence supported the conclusion that either the absence of a torque stripe or a broken torque stripe would have indicated the need for further inspection of the bolt's security. The court held that the majority of the Court of Appeal had incorrectly overturned the primary judge's findings of fact and had erred in their approach to establishing causation. Consequently, the High Court set aside the orders of the Court of Appeal and ordered that Mr McDermott's appeal to that court be dismissed.