Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd v CDG Pty Ltd

Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd brought an action against CDG Pty Ltd, claiming negligence in relation to the design of commercial premises which resulted in subsequent structural defects. The dispute was brought before the High Court of Australia, which was required to determine whether the engineers, as defendants, could be held liable for pure economic loss to a subsequent purchaser of the premises. The primary legal issue was whether the duty of care in negligence could extend to subsequent purchasers of commercial premises, particularly in light of the principles established in Bryan v Maloney and Fangrove. The court also considered whether the decision in Perre v Apand supported such an extension, and examined relevant overseas authorities to determine the appropriate scope of the duty of care.

The High Court held that the duty of care in negligence does not extend to subsequent purchasers of commercial premises for pure economic loss arising from defective design. The court distinguished between commercial purchasers and domestic home buyers, maintaining that the principles established in previous cases did not support extending liability to subsequent purchasers. The court found that the case did not disclose a cause of action in negligence against the defendants based on the agreed facts. Consequently, the question posed in the Stated Case was answered in the negative.

In light of the court's determination, Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the defendants' costs of the case stated. This outcome reflects the High Court's view that the duty of care in negligence does not encompass claims by subsequent purchasers of commercial premises for economic loss due to defective design.