Bostik Australia Pty Ltd v Liddiard & Anor

[2009] NSWCA 167

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Occupier's liability to employee of independent contractor
5. › Labour hire arrangement
6. › Degree of control over worker's activities
7. › Whether occupier assumed employer-like responsibilities
8. › Whether obligation to ensure safe system of work
1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Breach of duty
4. › Safe system of work
5. › Whether steps required to render system safe
6. › Whether precautions would have ameliorated risk of injury
7. › Absence of finding as to cause of injury
8. › Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 5B
1. Tort
2. › Negligence
3. › Apportionment of liability
4. › Respective duties of occupier and employer
5. › Principles governing appellate review of apportionment findings
1. Limitation of Actions
2. › Personal injury
3. › Date cause of action discoverable
4. › Whether knowledge of fault requires knowledge of legal liability or only knowledge of facts
5. › Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), ss 50C, 50D

Quick Take

For the purposes of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), s 50D(1)(b), a plaintiff must know not merely the facts but also the key factors necessary to establish legal liability, including the relationship giving rise to the defendant's fault. An occupier of premises does not owe a duty of care to an employee of an independent contractor merely because the occupier owns the premises and equipment, where the contractor retains practical control over the manner of work and the occupier does not exercise or assume employer-like control over the worker. A finding of breach of duty in negligence requires specific findings as to the cause of injury, what a safe system of work required, and whether precautions would have ameliorated the risk.