To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
The Facts
Balcony collapses due to deterioration of structural beams
The accident happened on 15 June 2012. Four people were injured
when a balcony collapsed at a rented residential property in
Collaroy, on Sydney's northern beaches.
The cause of the collapse was "weathered deterioration of
the structural beams and metal fixings".
The property was managed by a real estate agent on behalf of the
landlords. The property was leased to a tenant who had lived at the
property for about seven years.
All parties fully aware of balcony's defects
The real estate agent, landlords and the tenant were all fully
aware of the balcony's defects. The tenant, for example, who
was an architect, had made complaints to the real estate agent
about the state of the balcony as recently as February 2012, some
four months before the accident.
However, she continued to use the balcony and did not prevent
access to the balcony.
Those who were injured included the tenant's daughter and
three of her friends. They each made separate claims for
compensation arising from their injuries.
The tenant also claimed to have suffered damage and loss as a
result of witnessing the distress of her daughter and the
friends.
case a - The case for the landlords
case b - The case for the real estate agent
We wholly delegated our duties to the real estate agent and
therefore we are not responsible.
The real estate agent did not have adequate procedures in place
to ensure that inspections, follow ups and repairs were conducted
appropriately.
The tenant knew about the balcony defects, given that she lived
at the property for seven years and wrote to the managing agent
about the defects. The injuries would not have occurred if the
tenant had prevented access to the balcony.
The real estate agent did not ensure that an opinion about the
balcony from a properly qualified expert was obtained.
Therefore the court should find that it is the real estate
agent and the tenant who are responsible for the balcony collapse
and the resulting injuries.
The landlords did not wholly delegate to us full and free
authority in relation to repairs and inspections of the leased
property.
The landlords did not give us sufficient instructions regarding
the repairs.
The landlords did not respond adequately to the need for
repairs and the risks involved.
We were not ultimately responsible for arranging the
repairs.
The tenant knew about the balcony defects, given that she lived
at the property for seven years and wrote to us about the defects.
The injuries would not have occurred if the tenant had prevented
access to the balcony.
The landlords did not ensure that an opinion about the balcony
from a properly qualified expert was obtained.
Therefore the court should find that it is the landlords and
the tenant who are responsible for the balcony collapse and the
resulting injuries.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
