Multiplex Constructions (NSW) P/L v Lopez & 1 Ors [2004] NSWCA 319

Multiplex Constructions (NSW) P/L v Lopez & 1 Ors [2004] NSWCA 319

Multiplex owed a duty of care to workers on the site such as Mr Lopez because, as head contractor on a large and complex construction site, it had coordination and wet weather safety responsibilities. It breached that duty by authorising Pict employees to resume work or dewatering without reasonable steps such as inspecting the site, ascertaining the dangerous muddy water conditions, supervising the process, or providing adequate equipment. The trial judge was entitled to infer that a safer system would have reduced the risk of the accident. The damages awards, although generous, were not outside the permissible range, so the appeal failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal From District Court Judgment in Workplace Injury Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty and Damages Proceeding / Court of Appeal Appeal Against Liability and Damages
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['duty of Care of Head Contractor to Employee of Subcontractor' 'safe System of Work' 'wet Construction Site Access' 'construction Safety Regulations Reg 73(2)' 'causation' 'general Damages' 'past and Future Economic Loss']
['tort Law' 'workplace Safety' 'construction Law' 'damages'] ['duty of Care of Head Contractor to Employee of Subcontractor' 'safe System of Work' 'wet Construction Site Access' 'construction Safety Regulations Reg 73(2)' 'causation' 'general Damages' 'past and Future Economic Loss']

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

Appeal From District Court Judgment in Workplace Injury Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty and Damages Proceeding / Court of Appeal Appeal Against Liability and Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Multiplex as head contractor owed a duty of care to Mr Lopez, an employee of subcontractor Pict, in relation to access to and work on a wet and muddy construction site.' 'Whether Multiplex breached any duty of care by authorising Pict employees to resume work or dewatering without taking reasonable steps to ensure the site was safe.' "Whether any breach by Multiplex caused Mr Lopez's injury." 'Whether Multiplex breached regulation 73(2) of the Construction Safety Regulations under the Construction Safety Act 1912.' 'Whether the damages awarded for general damages and past and future economic loss were excessive.' 'Whether there was contributory negligence by Mr Lopez.']

Ratio Decidendi

Multiplex owed a duty of care to workers on the site such as Mr Lopez because, as head contractor on a large and complex construction site, it had coordination and wet weather safety responsibilities. It breached that duty by authorising Pict employees to resume work or dewatering without reasonable steps such as inspecting the site, ascertaining the dangerous muddy water conditions, supervising the process, or providing adequate equipment. The trial judge was entitled to infer that a safer system would have reduced the risk of the accident. The damages awards, although generous, were not outside the permissible range, so the appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The appellant to pay the costs of this appeal.']