CUNIS v LEE [1991] NSWCA 67

CUNIS v LEE [1991] NSWCA 67

The finding of negligence for failure to pick up the ball or warn was not supported by the evidence. However, sufficient evidence established that the pool table pockets were defective for a significant period, known to the hotel occupier, and this defect caused the ball to fall onto the floor and the plaintiff to be injured. Accordingly, the trial judge was justified in finding negligence on this latter basis, and the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Cunis; Respondent: Lee
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 1991
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Liability of Occupiers, Duty of Care, Hotel Premises, Defective Equipment, Injury to Patrons
Negligence Tort Law Liability of Occupiers Duty of Care Hotel Premises Defective Equipment Injury to Patrons

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

Parties

Cunis

Appellant

Lee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hotel occupier was negligent for failing to remove or warn about a pool ball on the floor.
  2. 2 Whether the defective condition of the pool table pockets constituted negligence by the hotel occupier resulting in injury.

Ratio Decidendi

The finding of negligence for failure to pick up the ball or warn was not supported by the evidence. However, sufficient evidence established that the pool table pockets were defective for a significant period, known to the hotel occupier, and this defect caused the ball to fall onto the floor and the plaintiff to be injured. Accordingly, the trial judge was justified in finding negligence on this latter basis, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.