Public Transport Commission (NSW) v Perry [1977] HCA 32
The train driver owed a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of the respondent, including keeping a proper lookout and responding appropriately to observed emergencies, and there was evidence on which the jury could find breaches of this duty, irrespective of whether the respondent was considered a trespasser, licensee, or invitee, given her involuntary presence on the tracks and the foreseeability of such events.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['negligence' 'duty of Care' "occupier's Liability" 'liability to Trespassers' 'railway Accidents']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Public Transport Commission owed a duty of care to the respondent who fell onto the railway line involuntarily' 'Whether the respondent was a trespasser, licensee, or invitee at the time of injury' 'Whether the train driver breached the duty of care by not keeping a proper lookout or acting promptly on seeing an object on the line']
Ratio Decidendi
The train driver owed a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of the respondent, including keeping a proper lookout and responding appropriately to observed emergencies, and there was evidence on which the jury could find breaches of this duty, irrespective of whether the respondent was considered a trespasser, licensee, or invitee, given her involuntary presence on the tracks and the foreseeability of such events.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Appeal dismissed with costs']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment