T.N.T. Transport Pty Ltd v Cross

T.N.T. Transport Pty Ltd, the applicant, sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The dispute concerned an action for damages for negligence brought by the respondent, an employee, against his employer. The applicant argued that the Full Court had imposed an onus on employers that extended beyond the common law duty to provide and maintain suitable plant and equipment, effectively requiring employers to act as designers and manufacturers.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Full Court had erred in law by expanding the employer's duty of care. Specifically, the applicant contended that the Full Court had found the employer liable for failing to modify the design of a delivery truck by adding hand-rails to facilitate access and egress, thereby imposing a duty to anticipate design trends and alter equipment beyond its original, acceptable specifications. The applicant argued this went beyond the established common law duties.

The applicant's submission was that the Full Court, by affirming the decision at first instance, had effectively extended the employer's duty of care to encompass the roles of a designer and manufacturer. The applicant highlighted that the truck in question was a standard model, widely sold internationally and in Australia, with no prior recorded complaints regarding its access and egress. The accident occurred in 1982, and while there was some suggestion that designers were considering hand-rails as desirable, the applicant argued that the employer should not be held liable for failing to modify a perfectly acceptable piece of equipment that conformed to the standards applicable at the time of purchase. The applicant questioned whether the Full Court had applied a standard of care different from that established in cases such as *Hamilton v Nuroof* and *Ferraloro*.