Tweed Shire Council v Hancomatic Music Pty Ltd

The case of *Tweed Shire Council v Hancomatic Music Pty Ltd* involved an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales concerning the liability of Hancomatic Music Pty Ltd, the owner of motel premises, and the Tweed Shire Council. The dispute arose from the death of a six-year-old child who suffered fatal injuries after running into a sliding glass door made of annealed glass at the motel reception area. The plaintiffs, the child's parents, sued Hancomatic, which in turn sought an indemnity from the Council, alleging breaches of duty of care.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether Hancomatic and/or the Council owed a duty of care to the deceased child and his parents, and if so, whether that duty was breached. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the use of annealed glass in the sliding door constituted a breach of duty, particularly in light of relevant building ordinances and Australian Standards that came into effect after the premises were constructed. The court also had to assess whether the Council, having approved the building, had a duty to advise or require compliance with these regulations, and whether the owner had a duty to conduct a safety audit during renovations.

The Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge's findings of fact regarding the timing of the construction and the applicability of the relevant Ordinance and Australian Standard. The court reasoned that the building was constructed before the Ordinance and the Australian Standard came into effect, rendering them not directly applicable to the original construction. The court clarified that the duty of care owed by the owner of premises is to take reasonable care in the circumstances, not to conduct specific safety audits, and that annealed glass was not considered a dangerous defect in the absence of knowledge of its specific dangers. The court found that neither Hancomatic nor the Council had breached their respective duties of care.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal upheld all appeals, meaning the original judgment in favour of the plaintiffs and the indemnity awarded to Hancomatic against the Council were overturned.