(82) For-instance, statutory settlement techniques that do not wanted claimants to ascertain blame for the injurer is actually ubiquitously inspired ‘no-fault’ strategies: select, for example, ‘Symposium: Tort Rules–No fault Insurance’ (1989) 26 San diego Laws Feedback 977.
(83) Come across Cane, ‘Fault and you may Rigorous Responsibility to possess Damage for the Tort Law’, over letter 8, 187-9; Cane, Obligation in-law and you can Morality, significantly more than letter 8, 82-4.
(84) In fact, there is certainly cause to trust one underneath the primarily defunct prominent law species of tight accountability, numerous those stored purely accountable had been actually to blame, because these instances of strict liability generally operate in cases where defendants got engaged in abnormally hazardous factors: come across John Fleming, What the law states away from Torts (9th ed, 1998) 369.
Mention, but not, one McHugh J after recanted their report pursuing the Higher Court’s decision for the Bankstown Foundry Pry Ltd v Braistina 1986) 160 CLR 301: Liftronic Pty Ltd v Unver (2001) 179 ALR 321, 329-31
(86) Select, eg, Bugge v Brownish (1919) twenty-six CLR 110; Canadian Pacific Rail Co v Lockhart Ac 591 ; Phoenix Neighborhood Inc v Cavenagh (1996) twenty-five MVR 143.
(90) Kondis v County Transport Authority (1986) 154 CLR 672, 687 (Mason J). See generally Glanville Williams, ‘Liability to possess Independent Contractors’ (1956) fourteen Cambridge Legislation Diary 180; J P Swanton, ‘Non-Delegable Commitments: Responsibility toward Negligence out-of Separate Contractors’ (Pt step one) (1991) 4 Journal regarding Package Law 183; J P Swanton, ‘Non-Delegable Obligations: Liability to your Neglect away from Independent Contracts’ (Pt dos) (1992) 5 Diary away from Offer Laws twenty six.
(93) Pick, particularly, Jones v Bartlett (2000) 205 CLR 166, 221 (Gummow and you will Hayne J); Scott v Davis (2000) 204 CLR 333, 417 (Gummow J); This new Southern area Wales v Lepore (2003) 212 CLR 511, 599 (Gummow and you may Hayne JJ).
See also Sir Harry Gibbs, ‘Living with Risk in Our Society’ (Occasional Paper, Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, 2002) < Kieran Tapsell, 'Turning the Negligence Juggernaut' (2002) 76 Australian Law Journal 581, 583
(97) Wilsons Clyde Coal Co Ltd v English Ac 57, 86-8 (Lord Meters); Albrighton v Knight in shining armor Alfred Hospital 2 NSWLR 542, 557 (Reynolds JA), 547 (Promise JA agreeing), 565 (Hutley JA agreeing); McDermid v Nash Dredging Reclamation Co Ltd Air conditioning 906, 919 (Lord Brandon); Brodribb Sawmilling Co Ply Ltd v Gray (1985) 160 CLR 16, 32 (Mason J); chicas escort Richardson TX Commonwealth v Introvigne (1981) 150 CLR 258, 269-70 (Mason J).
(98) It might be a remarkable exaggeration so you’re able to declare that which level features happened ‘across the board’. For instance, you to context where the blame requisite are evidently alive and you will better (about presently) ‘s the responsibility away from local authorities getting negligence: look for Brodie v Singleton Shire Council (2001) 206 CLR 512, 527-8 (Gleeson CJ), 577-82 (Gaudron, McHugh and you may Gummow JJ), 605-seven (Kirby J), 639 (Callinan J); Burwood Council v Byrnes NSWCA 343 (Unreported, Handley, Beazley and Hodgson JJA, ] Aust Torts Accounts [paragraph] 81-688, 64 543 (Handley JA), 63 547-8 (Promote AJA); Richmond Valley Council v Updates Aust Torts Accounts [paragraph] 81-679, 69 352-3, (69) 361-2 (Heydon JA); Wilkinson v Law Process of law Ltd NSWCA 196 (Unreported, Meagher and Heydon JJA and you may Rolfe AJA, ) -, – (Heydon JA).
(99) Among the best understood statements in connection with this is the fact away from McHugh JA in Bankstown Foundry Ply Ltd v Braistina Aust Torts Accounts [paragraph] 80-713 which mentioned that ‘[t]hroughout the common rules regarding carelessness . the standard of care and attention called for of a beneficial accused features gone close towards the edging of rigid liability’: during the 69 127. Regardless of if McHugh JA’s declaration is actually reproved to your appeal to brand new High Courtroom due to the fact ‘unfortunate for its habit of mislead’: Bankstown Foundry Pty Ltd v Braistina (1986) 160 CLR 301, 307 (Mason, Wilson and Dawson JJ), it’s been supported in other places towards the several times: pick, instance, Inverell Civil Council v Pennington Aust Torts Profile [paragraph] 81-234, 62 406, where Clarke JA mentioned that McHugh JA’s review truthfully reflected the newest modern legislation.
