Volman T/a Volman Engineering v Lobb; Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd v Lobb

This case involved an appeal and cross-appeal concerning a judgment awarded to Mr. Lobb, who slipped on mud on a footpath adjacent to a construction site. The primary judge had found Volman Engineering liable for creating the nuisance and Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd liable as the occupier of the site. Mr. Lobb suffered injuries as a result of the fall.

The central legal issues before the court were whether Mr. Lobb's claim in negligence was defeated by his own lack of care for his safety, whether Volman Engineering was liable in nuisance for operations on the adjoining land that caused mud to escape, whether Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd, as the owner, was also liable for the nuisance, and whether Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd should have known that the nuisance was occurring. The court also considered the apportionment of liability between Volman Engineering and Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd.

The court reasoned that while the primary judge correctly identified a public nuisance arising from the escape of mud from the site, which constituted a substantial and unreasonable interference with the public's right to use the footpath, her finding that Mr. Lobb's contributory negligence defeated his negligence claim was erroneous. The court held that contributory negligence should operate to reduce damages, not to extinguish the claim entirely. The court further found that Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd, as the occupier, was liable for the nuisance because it knew or ought to have known of the hazard, and Volman Engineering was liable for creating it. The primary judge's finding of 50% contributory negligence against Mr. Lobb was set aside.

The court allowed the appeal in part and the cross-appeal in part, setting aside the original judgment and entering a new judgment for Mr. Lobb against Volman Engineering and Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd for a reduced amount. The court also set aside the judgment on the cross-claims and declared that Volman Engineering and Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd were each liable for 50% of Mr. Lobb's judgment and costs, with liberty to apply for further judgment after satisfaction. The court also made orders regarding the costs of the appeals.