Aircraft Technicians of Australia Pty Ltd v St Clair; St Clair v Timtalla Pty Ltd

[2011] QCA 188

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Duty of care
4. › Aircraft maintenance
5. › Standard of care of licensed aircraft maintenance engineer
6. › Whether failure to identify non-approved bearing during service constituted breach
7. › Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth)
8. › Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (Cth)
1. Torts
2. › Vicarious liability
3. › Agency
4. › Whether wholly owned subsidiary acted as agent of parent company
5. › Distinction between employee and independent contractor
6. › Whether control test satisfied
7. › Salomon principle
1. Torts
2. › Non-delegable duty of care
3. › Bailment of chattel for repair
4. › Whether owner of helicopter owed non-delegable duty to lessee to ensure reasonable care taken by independent contractor repairer
5. › Whether categories of non-delegable duty should be extended
6. › Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd (1994) 179 CLR 520
1. Evidence
2. › Circumstantial evidence
3. › Inference from proved facts
4. › Jones v Dunkel
5. › Failure to call witness
6. › Whether inference available that NTN bearing installed at particular date

Quick Take

The owner of a chattel who engages an independent contractor to service or repair it does not owe a non-delegable duty of care to persons who may be injured by negligent servicing; the case of chattel repair does not fall within any recognised category of non-delegable duty. A Sanderson order requires identification of specific conduct by the unsuccessful defendant that compelled the plaintiff to continue proceedings against the successful defendant; a failure to make admissions in pleadings where the factual scenario is not ripe for admission is insufficient. Interest on special damages actually paid by the plaintiff should be awarded even where the trial judge makes no reference to it.