Where a public authority has actual knowledge of a specific risk of harm at a particular location (as demonstrated by its own documents and correspondence), it cannot rely on expert evidence that a reasonable authority would not have foreseen the precise sequence of events leading to injury. The foreseeability inquiry concerns whether injury to a class of persons could reasonably be foreseen, not whether the precise chain of events was foreseeable. Riding a bicycle down a grassed slope is not, without more, a 'dangerous recreational activity' under s 5L of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW). A public authority seeking to rely on s 42 must adduce evidence explaining its financial records; unexplained and ambiguous financial documents will not discharge the evidentiary burden.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.