Turjman v Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 392

Turjman v Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 392

Appeals dismissed with costs; although breach of duty was established against Stonewall for failing to properly brief the structural engineer, causation was not established as expert evidence did not support a finding that such breach contributed materially to the collapse of the ceiling and consequent injury. Leave to argue breach of implied warranty was refused due to incomplete factual findings and lack of expediency or justice in entertaining the new argument on appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
["occupier's Liability" 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'breach of Duty' 'structural Safety' 'expert Evidence']
['tort Law' 'negligence'] ["occupier's Liability" 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'breach of Duty' 'structural Safety' 'expert Evidence']

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

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Stonewall Hotel Pty Ltd breached its duty of care to appellants as occupier by failing to provide relevant information to a structural engineer.' "Whether causation was established between Stonewall's breach and the collapse of the ceiling leading to injuries." 'Whether leave should be granted to argue on appeal for breach of implied warranty of safety under Maclenan v Segar.']

Ratio Decidendi

Appeals dismissed with costs; although breach of duty was established against Stonewall for failing to properly brief the structural engineer, causation was not established as expert evidence did not support a finding that such breach contributed materially to the collapse of the ceiling and consequent injury. Leave to argue breach of implied warranty was refused due to incomplete factual findings and lack of expediency or justice in entertaining the new argument on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['In each appeal, appeal dismissed with costs']