(۸۲) By way of example, statutory payment systems which do not wanted claimants to determine fault with respect to brand new injurer is actually ubiquitously inspired ‘no-fault’ techniques: come across, such as for instance, ‘Symposium: Tort Legislation–No-fault Insurance’ (1989) twenty-six North park Law Comment 977.

(۸۳) Look for Cane, ‘Fault and you will Rigid Liability to own Damage inside Tort Law’, above letter 8, 187-9; Cane, Duty in law and Morality, above letter 8, 82-cuatro.

(۸۴) Indeed, there was cause to believe you to definitely in mainly defunct common legislation types of rigorous liability, numerous those people stored strictly accountable was indeed actually responsible, because these instances of strict accountability generally operate in situations where defendants had involved with unusually risky circumstances: get a hold of John Fleming, What the law states off Torts (9th ed, 1998) 369.

Mention, yet not, one McHugh J after recanted their declaration adopting the High Court’s decision within the Bankstown Foundry Pry Ltd v Braistina 1986) 160 CLR 301: Liftronic Pty Ltd v Unver (2001) 179 ALR 321, 329-30

(۸۶) Look for, instance, Bugge v Brown (1919) twenty six CLR 110; Canadian Pacific Railway Co v Lockhart Air conditioning 591 ; Phoenix People Inc v Cavenagh (1996) twenty-five MVR 143.

(۹۰) Kondis v Condition Transport Power (1986) 154 CLR 672, 687 (Mason J). Come across fundamentally Glanville Williams, ‘Liability getting Separate Contractors’ (1956) fourteen Cambridge Laws Diary 180; J P Swanton, ‘Non-Delegable Responsibilities: Responsibility to your Negligence away from Separate Contractors’ (Pt step one) (1991) 4 Record regarding Deal Laws 183; J P Swanton, ‘Non-Delegable Duties: Accountability towards the Carelessness of Independent Contracts’ (Pt 2) (1992) 5 Diary of Contract Legislation twenty-six.

(۹۳) Look for, such as, Jones v Bartlett (2000) 205 CLR 166, 221 (Gummow and you can Hayne J); Scott v Davis (2000) 204 CLR 333, 417 (Gummow J); The brand new South Wales v Lepore (2003) 212 CLR 511, 599 (Gummow and you can 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

(۹۷) Wilsons Clyde Coal Co Ltd v English Air-con 57, 86-8 (Lord Yards); Albrighton v San Jose CA escort service Knight in shining armor Alfred Hospital dos NSWLR 542, 557 (Reynolds JA), 547 (Vow JA agreeing), 565 (Hutley JA agreeing); McDermid v Nash Dredging Reclamation Co Ltd Air-con 906, 919 (Lord Brandon); Brodribb Sawmilling Co Ply Ltd v Gray (1985) 160 CLR 16, thirty-two (Mason J); Commonwealth v Introvigne (1981) 150 CLR 258, 269-70 (Mason J).

(۹۸) It will be a remarkable exaggeration to help you claim that so it height possess occurred ‘across the board’. As an example, one context the spot where the fault requisite is basically alive and you will better (at the least currently) is the accountability away from local authorities having carelessness: select Brodie v Singleton Shire Council (2001) 206 CLR 512, 527-8 (Gleeson CJ), 577-82 (Gaudron, McHugh and Gummow JJ), 605-eight (Kirby J), 639 (Callinan J); Burwood Council v Byrnes NSWCA 343 (Unreported, Handley, Beazley and you may Hodgson JJA, ] Aust Torts Reports [paragraph] 81-688, 64 543 (Handley JA), 63 547-8 (Promote AJA); Richmond Area Council v Updates Aust Torts Profile [paragraph] 81-679, 69 352-step 3, (69) 361-dos (Heydon JA); Wilkinson v Legislation Process of law Ltd NSWCA 196 (Unreported, Meagher and you will Heydon JJA and you may Rolfe AJA, ) -, – (Heydon JA).

(۹۹) One of the recommended identified comments in this regard is that of McHugh JA within the Bankstown Foundry Ply Ltd v Braistina Aust Torts Records [paragraph] 80-713 exactly who asserted that ‘[t]hroughout the typical legislation out of carelessness . the grade of care and attention necessary out-of a beneficial offender enjoys gone close to the border regarding strict liability’: within 69 127. Even though McHugh JA’s report was reproved towards appeal to the newest Higher Judge because the ‘unfortunate for its tendency to mislead’: Bankstown Foundry Pty Ltd v Braistina (1986) 160 CLR 301, 307 (Mason, Wilson and Dawson JJ), this has been recommended someplace else for the multiple circumstances: look for, particularly, Inverell Civil Council v Pennington Aust Torts Records [paragraph] 81-234, 62 406, in which Clarke JA asserted that McHugh JA’s feedback correctly reflected the new progressive rules.