Spedding v Nobles

The appellant, Spedding, sought to recover damages for injuries sustained during a criminal assault by a third party at a hotel licensed by the respondent, Nobles. The dispute concerned whether the hotel licensee owed a duty of care to protect its patrons from such assaults. The matter was heard on appeal in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the licensee owed a duty of care to the patron to protect them from criminal assault by third parties, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the court considered whether the powers and obligations conferred upon a hotel licensee by the *Liquor Act 1982* (NSW) created such a duty. Further, the court had to determine if the licensee had knowledge of a prior assault and robbery, and whether it was open to the trial judge to infer such knowledge, thereby establishing foreseeability of the risk of attack.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial judge's finding that the licensee did owe a duty of care to the patron. This duty arose from the licensee's control over the premises and the statutory obligations imposed by the *Liquor Act 1982* (NSW), which included a responsibility to ensure the safety of patrons. The court found that the evidence supported the inference that the licensee had knowledge of a previous assault and robbery, making the risk of a similar attack reasonably foreseeable. Consequently, the licensee's failure to take adequate steps to prevent the assault constituted a breach of that duty.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.