Wynbergen v Hoyts Corporation Pty Ltd

Wynbergen v Hoyts Corporation Pty Ltd concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by the plaintiff, Ms Wynbergen, against the decision of the Full Federal Court. Ms Wynbergen had suffered injuries when she slipped on a wet patch of floor in a cinema foyer operated by the defendant, Hoyts Corporation Pty Ltd. She alleged that Hoyts had breached its duty of care to her as an invitee by failing to maintain the premises in a safe condition.

The High Court was required to determine whether Hoyts had breached its duty of care to Ms Wynbergen. Specifically, the court considered whether Hoyts had taken all reasonable precautions to prevent foreseeable harm to its patrons, given the circumstances of the wet floor. This involved an assessment of the adequacy of Hoyts' cleaning and inspection procedures in the cinema foyer.

The court found that Hoyts had not breached its duty of care. It reasoned that while the presence of a wet patch on the floor was a foreseeable hazard in a cinema foyer, Hoyts had implemented reasonable procedures to mitigate this risk. These procedures included regular inspections and cleaning of the foyer. The court emphasised that a duty of care does not require the elimination of all risks, but rather the taking of all reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable harm. The evidence did not establish that the procedures in place were inadequate or that the staff had failed to follow them.

The appeal was dismissed.