Wright v KB Nut Holdings Pty Ltd

[2013] QCA 66

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Dangerous premises
4. › Injuries to persons entering premises
5. › Entry pursuant to contract
6. › Duty of care owed to contractual entrants
7. › Whether apartment operator breached duty to ensure premises as safe as reasonable care and skill could make them
8. › Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 11
1. Torts
2. › Negligence
3. › Causation
4. › But for test
5. › Whether failure to clean premises was necessary condition of needle stick injury
6. › Whether build-up of detritus obscured needle from vision
7. › Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 11
1. Appeal
2. › Interference with judge's findings of fact
3. › Functions of appellate court
4. › Findings on issue of negligence
5. › Whether primary judge failed to use or palpably misused advantage of trial judge
6. › Whether primary judge acted on evidence inconsistent with facts incontrovertibly established
1. Contract
2. › Implied terms
3. › Serviced apartment letting
4. › Implied term that premises be as safe as reasonable care and skill could make them
5. › Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 74(1)

Quick Take

An operator of serviced apartments owes a contractual duty to ensure the premises are as safe for the purpose of residing in as reasonable care and skill can make them. Where an apartment is left in a filthy condition with a build-up of detritus that obscures a hazard (here, a needle), the 'but for' test of causation is satisfied because proper cleaning would likely have discovered or removed the hazard, and the filthy condition obscured it from the occupant's vision. A trial judge's acceptance of evidence about the filthy state of premises is irreconcilable with a finding that standard cleaning procedures were followed, and such irreconcilability warrants appellate intervention.