KINGROM PTY LTD v SAWKA [1996] NSWCA 306

KINGROM PTY LTD v SAWKA [1996] NSWCA 306

There was no evidentiary basis for inferring that the glass which injured the respondent fell or was knocked from a table near the dance floor; even if a foreseeable risk existed, placing tables two-thirds of a metre from the dance floor did not constitute negligence because the risk was slight and such placement is common in nightclubs.

Parties
Appellant: Kingrom Pty Ltd; Respondent: Sawka
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal upheld
Legal Topics
Occupier's Liability, Negligence, Reasonable Response to Foreseeable Risk
Tort Law Occupier's Liability Negligence Reasonable Response to Foreseeable Risk

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kingrom Pty Ltd

Appellant

Sawka

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant breached its duty of care as an occupier by placing tables near the dance floor.
  2. 2 Whether the risk of injury from glass travelling across the dance floor constituted negligence.

Ratio Decidendi

There was no evidentiary basis for inferring that the glass which injured the respondent fell or was knocked from a table near the dance floor; even if a foreseeable risk existed, placing tables two-thirds of a metre from the dance floor did not constitute negligence because the risk was slight and such placement is common in nightclubs.

Court Disposition

appeal upheld

Orders

  • Judgment of Dent DCJ set aside.
  • Verdict entered for appellant.