Oz: party hosts not liable for barbecue misuse

At approximately 2 a.m., long after the 18-year-old host’s parents had gone to bed, some guests at a backyard party decided they would relight the barbecue. Ignoring warnings, one of them poured in an entire bottle of lighting fluid and the resulting fireball injured a second guest, who sued the family for improper party supervision […]

At approximately 2 a.m., long after the 18-year-old host’s parents had gone to bed, some guests at a backyard party decided they would relight the barbecue. Ignoring warnings, one of them poured in an entire bottle of lighting fluid and the resulting fireball injured a second guest, who sued the family for improper party supervision and won a A$210,000 damages award. In November, however, the high court of the state of New South Wales overturned that award, holding that the parents could not reasonably have foreseen the guests’ irresponsible behavior. According to attorney Julie Cameron of Corrs Chambers Westgarth (“Thank God It’s Friday: Appeal Judges extinguish BBQ claim”, Dec. 3), the plaintiffs also “argued that consideration should be given to North American case law, where a doctrine known as Social Host Liability has been adopted, attaching liability to hosts at parties where alcohol is served.” But the court did not find the North American law persuasive, finding that in Australia:

Barbecue parties with liquor attended by young adults occur in their hundreds all over Australia every evening; the perception that the activity, supervised or unsupervised by older adults, is one involving a foreseeable risk of personal injury is, in my opinion, an entirely wrong perception.

The appellants were not in any relationship with the guests which has been or should be established by judicial authority to impose any special duty or responsibility for the safety of the guests.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Tobias said Australian community opinion would reject any open-ended extension of liability to homeowners for the general misconduct of inebriated guests, “the burden of which would inevitably result in social functions where alcohol is served becoming a thing of the past”. (Parissis and Ors. v. Bourke). See The Third Branch (blog), Nov. 30. For more items from Down Under — including numerous hopeful developments in recent years as the country has pulled back from a previous swing toward litigiousness — see our Australia page.

Comments are closed.