A public authority's warning sign that uses the words 'sudden steep descent' may adequately discharge the duty of care even where the actual terrain involves near-vertical drops to hard rocky surfaces, provided the sign is prominently placed and visible to all entrants. The content of a warning sign must be assessed prospectively by reference to the range of foreseeable risks to the class of entrants, not retrospectively by reference to the specific risk that materialised. The question whether a sign should have been placed in a different location is not whether a different location would have been 'more appropriate' but whether the chosen location departed from a standard of reasonable care. McLure JA's dissent raises an unresolved question about whether the 'safe for users exercising reasonable care' formulation applies under the Occupiers Liability Act 1985 (WA).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.