Barclay v Bootle & Ors [2012] NSWDC 29

Barclay v Bootle & Ors [2012] NSWDC 29

Plaintiffs succeeded in establishing, on the balance of probabilities, that the aerial spraying of glyphosate on 6 July 2005 drifted onto their 'Sues', 'Little Gibsons', and 'Paddy's' paddocks, causing crop and lucerne loss. Liability for that loss is joint and several as against all defendants, by operation of the Civil Liability Act/common law (non-delegable duty) and, as against the third and fourth defendants, under the Damage by Aircraft Act 1999 (Cwlth). Plaintiffs failed to establish causation for damage to other paddocks, so those heads of claim were dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiffs: Mr & Mrs Barclay; 1st Defendant: Mr Bootle; 2nd Defendant: Bootle Bros Management P/L; 3rd Defendant: Macquarie Valley Agricultural Services P/L; 4th Defendant: Mr Shapley
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiffs partially succeed. Verdict entered against each defendant for damage to the 'Sues', 'Little Gibsons', and 'Paddy's' paddocks and associated lucerne, sum to be calculated in accordance with findings. Plaintiffs' claims in relation to other paddocks dismissed. Third party proceedings dismissed. Costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Aerial Spraying, Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Absolute Liability, Damage by Aircraft Act, Causation, Broad Acre Farming
Torts Statutory Liability Agricultural Law Aerial Spraying Negligence Vicarious Liability Absolute Liability Damage by Aircraft Act +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr & Mrs Barclay

Plaintiffs

Mr Bootle

1st Defendant

Bootle Bros Management P/L

2nd Defendant

Macquarie Valley Agricultural Services P/L

3rd Defendant

Mr Shapley

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Principal Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether aerial spraying of glyphosate caused damage to the plaintiffs' crops
  2. 2 Whether defendants are liable in negligence or under the Damage by Aircraft Act 1999 (Cwlth)
  3. 3 Appropriate measure and quantification of damages for crop and lucerne loss

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiffs succeeded in establishing, on the balance of probabilities, that the aerial spraying of glyphosate on 6 July 2005 drifted onto their 'Sues', 'Little Gibsons', and 'Paddy's' paddocks, causing crop and lucerne loss. Liability for that loss is joint and several as against all defendants, by operation of the Civil Liability Act/common law (non-delegable duty) and, as against the third and fourth defendants, under the Damage by Aircraft Act 1999 (Cwlth). Plaintiffs failed to establish causation for damage to other paddocks, so those heads of claim were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs partially succeed. Verdict entered against each defendant for damage to the 'Sues', 'Little Gibsons', and 'Paddy's' paddocks and associated lucerne, sum to be calculated in accordance with findings. Plaintiffs' claims in relation to other paddocks dismissed. Third party proceedings dismissed. Costs reserved.

Orders

  • Verdict for plaintiffs against all defendants for damage to wheat and lucerne as found. Judgment to reflect quantum calculations from reasons at [158] (wheat and other losses) and [183] (lucerne loss).
  • Third party proceedings dismissed.