Sweeney v Boylan Nominees Pty Ltd

The case of *Sweeney v Boylan Nominees Pty Ltd* concerned a dispute between the plaintiff, Ms Sweeney, and the defendant, Boylan Nominees Pty Ltd, a company that operated a shopping centre. Ms Sweeney alleged that she had suffered personal injury as a result of slipping on a grape in the shopping centre’s food court. The proceedings were heard in the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff in relation to the presence of the grape on the floor of the food court, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Central to this was the question of whether the defendant had taken reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm to its invitees, such as Ms Sweeney, from slipping hazards in the food court.

In their joint judgment, McHugh ACJ and Kirby J considered the principles of occupiers' liability. They held that an occupier of premises owes a duty of care to lawful visitors to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable injury. The court found that the presence of grapes in a food court was a foreseeable hazard. However, the court ultimately determined that the defendant had not breached its duty of care. This was because the evidence did not establish that the defendant had failed to take reasonable precautions. The court noted that the defendant had a system in place for cleaning the food court, and there was no evidence to suggest that this system was inadequate or that the defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of the specific grape that caused the plaintiff's fall. The mere presence of a hazard did not automatically equate to a breach of duty; rather, the focus was on the reasonableness of the defendant's actions or omissions in managing the risk.

The High Court allowed the appeal and ordered that the plaintiff's claim be dismissed.