Australian Safewaystores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtHigh Court
Neutral Citation1987-0310 HCA B,[1987] HCA 7
Date1987
Year1987

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
131 cases
  • Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Anzil
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • November 23, 2000
    ...CLR 431 at 475 [115]. 42 cf Schiller v Mulgrave Shire Council (1972) 129 CLR 116 at 120; Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479 at 488; Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609 at 617–618; Northern Sandblasting Pty Ltd v Harris (1997) 188 CLR 313 at 340, 342–343, 347, 43 ......
  • Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW v Dederer
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • August 30, 2007
    ...some areas of the law of negligence, however, the duty is expressed in more limited and specific terms. Until the decision of this Court in Zaluzna63, for example, the duty owed to entrants upon privately owned land varied according to the category of the entrants. They were classified as i......
  • Vairy v Wyong Shire Council
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • October 21, 2005
    ...‘should be buried so securely that [its] perturbed spirits shall no longer vex the law.’ 19Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479. 20Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, 5th ed (1984) at 356. 21Geyer v Downs (1977) 138 CLR 91. 22Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 47......
  • Woods v Multi-Sport Holdings Pty Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • March 7, 2002
    ...explained that the reformulation of the common law in respect of the liability of occupiers to entrants, expressed in Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna69 and the decisions that preceded it 70, had not overruled the principle governing the liability to contractual entrants stated i......
  • Get Started for Free
7 firm's commentaries
7 books & journal articles
  • Government liability in negligence.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 32 No. 1, April 2008
    • April 1, 2008
    ...81-376; BT v Oei [1999] NSWSC 1082 (Unreported, Bell J, 5 November 1999). (175) See, eg, Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479. Cf Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre Pry Ltd v Anzil (2000) 205 CLR 254. (176) See, eg, Howard v Jarvis (1958) 98 CLR 177; Dixon v Western ......
  • THE PROMISE OF UNIVERSALITY
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • December 1, 2013
    ...13 at [25]. 147 [2012] EWCA Civ 239 at [44] and [71]–[73]. 148 [2013] 3 SLR 284 at [44], [62]–[65], [98], [100], [130] and [144]. 149 (1987) 162 CLR 479. 150 For an excellent exegesis of the authorities in respect of the imposition of a non-delegable duty of care, see Woodland v The Swimmin......
  • The site
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume II - Third Edition
    • April 13, 2020
    ...this chapter): see Papatonakis v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1985) 156 CLr 7; Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLr 479; Ratclif v McConnell [1999] 1 WLr 670 (Ca); Vairy v Wyong Shire Council (2005) 223 CLr 422 at 432 [25], per Mchugh J (dissenting); Leich......
  • Case Note OCCUPIER'S LIABILITY AND NEGLIGENCE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • December 1, 2013
    ...remains unclear. 31 British Railway Board v Herrington [1972] AC 877. 32 c 3. 33 Occupier's Liability Act (1984) (c 3) (UK) s1(3). 34 (1987) 162 CLR 479. 35 It should be noted that the High Court of Australia had long been championing the idea that ordinary principles of negligence should a......
  • Get Started for Free