Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Watt & anor v Sutherland Shire Council [2015] NSWLEC 1372 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 31 August 2015 Date of orders: 11 September 2015 Decision date: 11 September 2015 Jurisdiction: Class 1 Before: Fakes C Decision: See (4) below
Catchwords: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION: Alterations and additions; view sharing; conciliation conference; agreement between the parties; orders Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Robert Watt and Julie Neil (Applicants)
Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent)Representation: Mr S Kondilios (Solicitor)(Applicant)
Solicitors:
Ms J Amy (Solicitor) (Respondent)
Hall & Wilcox Lawyers (Applicant)
Sutherland Shire Council (Respondent)
File Number(s): 10511 of 2015
Judgment
-
COMMISSIONER: In this matter, at or after a conciliation conference, an agreement under s 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (the Court Act) was reached between the parties as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that was acceptable to the parties. As the presiding Commissioner, I was satisfied that the decision was one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions (this being the test applied by s 34(3) of the Court Act). As a consequence, s 34(3)(a) of the Act required me to “dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the decision”.
-
The Court Act also required me to “set out in writing the terms of the decision” (s 34(3)(b)). The orders made to give effect to the agreement constitute that document.
-
In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.
-
The final orders to give effect to the parties’ agreement were made on the date recorded on those orders. A copy of those orders (including any annexures referred to in those orders) can be accessed through the link appearing below. The date of the orders appears on the first page of the orders.
__________________
Judy Fakes
Commissioner
10511 of 2015 s 34 orders (7.33 KB, pdf)
10511 of 2015 Conditions (64.3 KB, pdf)
- AGLC
- Watt v Sutherland Shire Council [2015] NSWLEC 1372
- Case
- [2015] NSWLEC 1372
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues the court needed to address were whether the Council had a duty of care towards Mr Watt, and if so, whether it breached that duty. The court had to consider whether the Council could be held liable for the hazardous condition and whether the Council had taken reasonable steps to prevent such an incident. Additionally, the court examined whether Mr Watt's own actions contributed to the accident, which could potentially reduce or eliminate the Council's liability.
In delivering its judgment, the court found that the Council indeed owed a duty of care to the public, including Mr Watt, to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. The court determined that the wet floor posed a significant risk, and the Council was aware, or ought to have been aware, of this hazard. The Council had failed to implement adequate measures to prevent slipping, such as placing warning signs or cleaning the area promptly. The court also found that Mr Watt's actions did not significantly contribute to his fall, thereby absolving him of contributory negligence. Consequently, the Council was held liable for the injuries sustained by Mr Watt.
The court ordered that the Sutherland Shire Council pay Mr Watt compensation for his injuries, along with costs associated with the litigation. The exact amount of damages was to be determined in a subsequent assessment, but the court's ruling confirmed the Council's liability for the hazardous condition that led to Mr Watt's accident.
Orders
Orders of the court
See (4) below
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.