NERCESSIAN v SECURITY COMPUTER SERVICES PTY LTD [1998] NSWCA 157

NERCESSIAN v SECURITY COMPUTER SERVICES PTY LTD [1998] NSWCA 157

It was open to the trial Judge to accept expert evidence concluding the respondent had taken reasonable care to protect the appellant, an experienced tradesman, from foreseeable risks associated with accessing the roof. The method of access did not constitute an unusual danger and complied sufficiently with industry standards for experienced workers. Therefore, no negligence was found and the trial Judge's decision stands.

Parties
Appellant: Yervant Nercessian; Respondent: Security Computer Services Pty Ltd; Third Party: Atlas Air Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Occupiers' Liability, Safe System of Work
Tort Law Negligence Occupiers' Liability Safe System of Work

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yervant Nercessian

Appellant

Security Computer Services Pty Ltd

Respondent

Atlas Air Pty Ltd

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed in its duty of care to provide a safe means of access to the roof as required under occupiers' liability; whether failure to comply with Australian Standard AS 1657 constituted negligence; whether evidence of prior complaints established knowledge of risk; whether expert evidence established a need for a conforming ladder and precautions.

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the trial Judge to accept expert evidence concluding the respondent had taken reasonable care to protect the appellant, an experienced tradesman, from foreseeable risks associated with accessing the roof. The method of access did not constitute an unusual danger and complied sufficiently with industry standards for experienced workers. Therefore, no negligence was found and the trial Judge's decision stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Cross-appeal dismissed with costs.