Zerella Holdings Pty Ltd v Williams

Zerella Holdings Pty Ltd appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia against a decision of a District Court judge. The dispute concerned whether a loading bay at the appellant's business premises constituted a "road" or "road-related area" for the purposes of the *Motor Vehicles Act 1959* (SA). This determination was a preliminary issue in proceedings brought by the second respondent, who sustained injuries while a forklift was being used to unload a semi-trailer in the loading bay. The forklift was uninsured, and the plaintiff had joined the Nominal Defendant as a defendant.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the trial judge had erred in concluding that the loading bay was not a "road" or "road-related area" as defined by section 5 of the *Motor Vehicles Act 1959* (SA). This required the court to consider whether the loading bay was a place "open to or used by the public" within the meaning of the Act.

Kourakis CJ and Blue J, dismissing the appeal, reasoned that to determine if private premises are open to or used by the public, one must examine both the occupier's terms for legal access and the actual access granted. They distinguished between a general invitation to the public and specific invitations for business purposes. In this instance, the invitees were not considered members of the public, and the use of the loading bay for its intended purpose of loading carrier vehicles did not render it an area open to or used by the public. Consequently, they upheld the trial judge's conclusion.

Gray J, dissenting, found that the trial judge had not adequately considered the term "road-related area." His Honour noted that customers drove into and made substantial use of the loading bay, with hundreds of vehicles entering the area weekly. This evidence, in his view, was sufficient to conclude that the loading bay was "open to or used by the public" and therefore fell within the definition of a "road-related area."