Ian Douglas Cocks v Blacktown City Council and the State of New South Wales [2012] NSWDC 189

Ian Douglas Cocks v Blacktown City Council and the State of New South Wales [2012] NSWDC 189

The presence of a fire hose and concrete bund at the shed entrance created a foreseeable and significant hazard to entrants, for which the occupier (second defendant) was liable in negligence. The plaintiff was not an employee for Workers Compensation Act purposes and section 151Z did not apply. The plaintiff was contributorily negligent (20%) in the way he moved backwards while unloading. The owner (first defendant) owed no relevant duty of care as it was not the occupier.

Parties
Plaintiff: Ian Douglas Cocks; First Defendant: Blacktown City Council; Second Defendant: State of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injuries / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant (State of New South Wales); first defendant not liable; damages awarded subject to final calculation and contributory negligence reduction.
Legal Topics
Personal Injuries, Foreseeability, Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Damages, Employment Relationship, Meaning of Worker, Economic Loss, Vicissitudes
Tort Law Negligence Occupiers' Liability Workers Compensation Personal Injuries Foreseeability Contributory Negligence Damages +4 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Douglas Cocks

Plaintiff

Blacktown City Council

First Defendant

State of New South Wales

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injuries / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the fire hose and concrete hump posed a foreseeable risk and constituted negligence by the occupier;
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence;
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was an 'employee' or 'independent contractor' for the purposes of section 151Z Workers Compensation Act 1987;

Ratio Decidendi

The presence of a fire hose and concrete bund at the shed entrance created a foreseeable and significant hazard to entrants, for which the occupier (second defendant) was liable in negligence. The plaintiff was not an employee for Workers Compensation Act purposes and section 151Z did not apply. The plaintiff was contributorily negligent (20%) in the way he moved backwards while unloading. The owner (first defendant) owed no relevant duty of care as it was not the occupier.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant (State of New South Wales); first defendant not liable; damages awarded subject to final calculation and contributory negligence reduction.

Orders

  • Total damages calculated at $477,128.00; after 20% contributory negligence reduction, verdict amount is $381,702.40.
  • Judgment not to be entered until counsel checks figures.