Seiko Australia Pty Ltd v Da Rin

Seiko Australia Pty Ltd appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a judgment entered in favour of Mr Da Rin in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned Mr Da Rin's claim for damages for personal injuries sustained when he fell down a grassed bank adjacent to a car park at premises occupied by Seiko Australia. Mr Da Rin had taken a shortcut from the car park down the bank to reach the building, despite the availability of obvious and convenient pathways.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether Seiko Australia, as occupier, had breached its duty of care to Mr Da Rin, an entrant, by failing to prevent him from suffering injury. The court was also required to consider the implications of restitution and repayment of moneys paid under a prior judgment that was subsequently overturned on appeal.

The Court of Appeal found that Seiko Australia had not breached its duty of care. The court reasoned that the pathways available were obvious and convenient, and the additional travel time to use them was insignificant. Therefore, it was not foreseeable that an entrant would attempt to take a shortcut down the grassed bank, nor was it necessary for the occupier to take steps to prevent such an occurrence. The court also confirmed the principle that where a successful plaintiff has received payment of a judgment which is later set aside on appeal, the defendant is entitled to repayment of that sum, along with interest.

The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, setting aside the original verdict and judgment. It substituted a verdict and judgment in favour of the appellant, Seiko Australia, ordering that Mr Da Rin pay Seiko Australia the sum of $162,526.12, together with interest. Mr Da Rin was also to receive a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act if otherwise entitled.