Australian Iron & Steel Ltd v Ryan [1957] HCA 25

Australian Iron & Steel Ltd v Ryan [1957] HCA 25

The relevant sub-regulations are valid exercises of the regulation-making power, impose duties of sufficient precision, and create private rights enforceable by action for damages in favour of persons injured by their breach. The existence of a penalty does not preclude a civil remedy.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['statutory Duty' 'civil Remedies for Breach of Statutory Duty' 'scaffolding and Lifts Act' 'regulation Making Power' 'employer Liability']
['tort Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['statutory Duty' 'civil Remedies for Breach of Statutory Duty' 'scaffolding and Lifts Act' 'regulation Making Power' 'employer Liability']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether sub-regulations (2) and (5) of regulation 73 of the Scaffolding and Lifts Regulations confer a civil right of action for damages to persons injured by their breach without proof of negligence' 'Validity and scope of the regulation-making power under the Scaffolding and Lifts Act 1912-1948 N.S.W.' 'Whether a breach of the relevant regulation creates a private right to damages or only results in a penalty']

Ratio Decidendi

The relevant sub-regulations are valid exercises of the regulation-making power, impose duties of sufficient precision, and create private rights enforceable by action for damages in favour of persons injured by their breach. The existence of a penalty does not preclude a civil remedy.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']