White v Bunning Bros Pty Ltd

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant, Mr White, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Court, which had affirmed a trial judge's finding. Mr White was injured when sheets of chipboard fell on him while he was a customer in the respondent's hardware store.

The applicant argued that the courts below erred in several respects. Firstly, it was contended that the courts conflated the foreseeability of the risk of injury with the foreseeability of the precise manner in which the injury occurred. Secondly, the applicant asserted that the Full Court wrongly concluded that the case argued on appeal differed from that presented at trial, submitting that the improper stacking of chipboard had been clearly raised in the pleadings, evidence, and closing addresses. Thirdly, the applicant argued that the Full Court erred in finding him precluded from relying on particulars of negligence concerning the unsafe stacking of chipboard, as the trial judge had indeed found the stacking to be unsafe and the pleadings were sufficiently broad. Finally, the applicant contended that the finding that he was a "volunteer" and therefore the respondent was not liable was an error of law, arguing that this concept has no place in modern negligence law distinct from a plea of contributory negligence.

The applicant's primary submission was that special leave should be granted due to the need for clarification on the concept of "volunteer" in negligence, the apparent error of the Full Court in confining the applicant by the particulars, and the deprivation of a proper consideration of the merits of the appeal due to the Full Court's reliance on the pleading issue. The applicant was injured when approximately 20 sheets of chipboard, each seven feet by four feet and weighing 30 kilograms, fell on him while he was being served as a customer in the respondent's self-service hardware store.