Hunt v Knight Frank (NSW) Pty Ltd & 2 Ors

[2005] NSWCA 139

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort Law
2. › Negligence
3. › Occupier's liability
4. › Breach of duty of care
5. › Object placed immediately in front of lift doors
6. › Whether reasonably foreseeable that person exiting lift would trip
7. › Obligation on entrants to take reasonable care for own safety
1. Evidence
2. › Circumstantial evidence
3. › Inferences from proved facts
4. › Whether evidence supported reasonable and definite inference
5. › Facts peculiarly within defendant's knowledge
6. › Slight evidence sufficient unless explained away
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Bullock and Sanderson orders
4. › Whether unsuccessful defendant's conduct made such order appropriate
5. › Whether denial of liability unreasonable

Quick Take

An occupier who is the exclusive possessor of premises bears an evidentiary burden to explain how a hazard came to be present when the facts are peculiarly within its knowledge and slight circumstantial evidence supports an adverse inference. Placing an object immediately in front of lift doors constitutes a trap and is negligent because a person exiting a lift, even taking reasonable care, would not expect to find a large obstacle in that position.