Samsung Electronics Australia Pty Ltd v Macura

Samsung Electronics Australia Pty Ltd (Samsung) was the defendant in proceedings brought by Mr Macura, an employee of a third-party logistics company engaged by Samsung to perform warehouse functions. Mr Macura sustained a back injury while unloading a container of electrical goods. He alleged that Samsung owed him a duty of care. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether Samsung owed Mr Macura a duty of care analogous to the non-delegable duty owed by an employer to an employee, and whether Samsung owed Mr Macura a duty of care of the type described in *Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd*.

The Court of Appeal found that Samsung did not owe Mr Macura a non-delegable duty of care. It reasoned that such a duty typically arises in an employer-employee relationship, where the employer has control over the employee's work and is responsible for their safety. In this instance, Mr Macura was employed by a separate company, and Samsung did not exercise the requisite degree of control over his specific tasks to establish a similar duty. The court also considered the principles in *Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Co Pty Ltd*, which outlines factors relevant to the existence of a duty of care in negligence, particularly in situations involving independent contractors. The court concluded that the relationship between Samsung and Mr Macura did not give rise to the type of duty of care contemplated by that case.

Leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was allowed. The verdict and judgment in favour of Mr Macura were set aside, and in their place, a verdict and judgment were entered for Samsung.