Walker and Anor v Corporation of the City of Adelaide and Ors No. SCCIV-01-1272

(2004) 88 SASR 225; [2004] SASC 98

Supreme Court of South Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Independent contractor
5. › Non-delegable duty
6. › Excavation on adjoining land
7. › Whether building owner or occupier owes non-delegable duty for negligence of independent contractor in excavation works
8. › Whether extra-hazardous operations doctrine applies
1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Consulting engineers
5. › Scope of duty
6. › Whether consulting engineer breached duty of care by failing to prevent excavation by contractor
1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Local government authority
5. › Development approval
6. › Whether council owed duty of care to prevent excavation on land it owned but did not occupy or control
7. › Whether ability to control relevant activity is factor in establishing duty of care
1. Tort
2. › Nuisance
3. › Withdrawal of support
4. › Natural right of support for land
5. › Whether right extends to support for additional weight of buildings
6. › Whether owner not in occupation liable for nuisance created by independent contractor

Quick Take

A building owner or developer who engages a competent independent contractor to carry out excavation works on adjoining land does not owe a non-delegable duty of care to neighbouring landowners for the contractor's negligence, where the excavation is an everyday occurrence that can be safely performed with known safeguards. A local government authority that owns land but is not in occupation and has no contractual relationship with or ability to control the contractor does not owe a duty of care to prevent the contractor's negligent excavation. The natural right of support at common law does not extend to support for the additional weight of buildings on adjoining land.