Novakovic v Stekovik [2011] NSWDC 253

Novakovic v Stekovik [2011] NSWDC 253

The risk of harm was not foreseeable nor significant; defendants could not reasonably have anticipated the plaintiff's reaction. No breach of duty or liability established; the plaintiff's claim fails.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's statement of claim dismissed; judgment for the defendants.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'duty of Care' 'dangerous Animals' "occupier's Liability"]
['tort Law'] ['negligence' 'duty of Care' 'dangerous Animals' "occupier's 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

Civil / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Was the incident and resulting injury foreseeable such that a duty of care existed?' 'Did the defendants owe the plaintiff a duty to restrain the dog or warn her of its presence?' 'Was there breach of duty and causation?' 'Was the plaintiff contributorily negligent in her response to the dog?']

Ratio Decidendi

The risk of harm was not foreseeable nor significant; defendants could not reasonably have anticipated the plaintiff's reaction. No breach of duty or liability established; the plaintiff's claim fails.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's statement of claim dismissed; judgment for the defendants.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's statement of claim is dismissed" 'Judgment for the defendants' 'Liberty is reserved to the parties to approach to have the matter listed for submissions as to costs on or before 2 May 2011' 'Absent the receipt of submissions on costs to the contrary, the order as to costs will take effect from 2...