Stanberg v State of New South Wales
Case
•
[2025] NSWCA 127
•06 June 2025
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Stanberg v State of New South Wales [2025] NSWCA 127
[2025] NSWCA 127
06 June 2025
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellant, Stanberg, brought proceedings against the State of New South Wales, alleging negligence. The dispute concerned injuries sustained by the appellant to his back during a long jump competition at primary school. The appellant contended that the landing area lacked a sufficient quantity of properly raked sand, and that this failure to take reasonable precautions was a necessary condition of his harm. The matter was heard by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the respondent owed a non-delegable duty of care to the appellant and, if so, whether the respondent breached that duty by failing to ensure adequate sand in the long jump landing area. Secondly, the court had to consider whether the primary judge erred in assessing the appellant's damages, specifically in relation to loss of earning capacity for an injury sustained as a child and in assessing non-economic loss at 20% of a most extreme case.
The Court of Appeal found that the respondent did owe a non-delegable duty of care. It reasoned that the failure to ensure a proper landing area constituted a breach of this duty, and that this breach was a causative factor in the appellant's injury. The court also determined that the primary judge had erred in the assessment of damages. The appeal was allowed, the previous orders were set aside, and judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $276,500 plus interest, with the defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs both at trial and on appeal.
The Court of Appeal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether the respondent owed a non-delegable duty of care to the appellant and, if so, whether the respondent breached that duty by failing to ensure adequate sand in the long jump landing area. Secondly, the court had to consider whether the primary judge erred in assessing the appellant's damages, specifically in relation to loss of earning capacity for an injury sustained as a child and in assessing non-economic loss at 20% of a most extreme case.
The Court of Appeal found that the respondent did owe a non-delegable duty of care. It reasoned that the failure to ensure a proper landing area constituted a breach of this duty, and that this breach was a causative factor in the appellant's injury. The court also determined that the primary judge had erred in the assessment of damages. The appeal was allowed, the previous orders were set aside, and judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $276,500 plus interest, with the defendant ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs both at trial and on appeal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Negligence & Tort
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Duty of Care
-
Causation
-
Damages
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Negligence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
30
Statutory Material Cited
2
AEA Constructions Pty Ltd v Wharekawa;; AEA Constructions Pty Ltd v Building Partners Pty Ltd
[2019] NSWCA 176
Coleman v Barrat
[2004] NSWCA 27
Coote v Kelly
[2016] NSWSC 1447