Australia: Collingwood Hotel Pty Limited v O´Reilly; Night Knowledge Security Pty Limited v O´Reilly

Last Updated: 3 July 2007

[2007] NSW CA 155
27 June 2007

Tobias JA; Basten JA; Handley AJA

In Brief

  • The duty of an occupier of licensed premises to take reasonable care for the safety of patrons depends on proof that they knew or ought to have known facts requiring intervention to protect patrons and that they failed to take reasonable steps to safeguard an injured person from a foreseeable risk of harm.
  • A plaintiff must establish a causal connection between a breach of duty and the injury sustained.


  • The plaintiff attended the Collingwood Hotel to participate in karaoke. After the karaoke concluded, she and other patrons moved to the front bar.
  • At about 12.45am an incident occurred involving at least two men, as a result of which one man was hurt and bleeding from his head. Security guards identified and removed the assailant and the plaintiff, who had nursing training, attended to the injured man. As the first assailant was being ejected from the Hotel, a further fracas developed and one or more patrons were knocked over, falling heavily across the plaintiff's back. She suffered a disc lesion in her lower back.
  • The plaintiff sued the occupier of the hotel ("the Hotel") and the licensee of the hotel ("the Licensee"). She also sued the security contractor ("Security") which provided four security guards who were working at the Hotel on the night in question.
  • The existence of ethnic tensions amongst "white Australian males" and "Islanders" at the Hotel was known by the defendants.

Decision of Trial Judge

  • The critical issue at trial was whether the Hotel and Security staff ought reasonably to have foreseen after the first fight the risk of a further fight erupting with the possibility that this would cause injury to an innocent patron such as the plaintiff.
  • Ashford DCJ accepted there were two fights in the Hotel that evening. Her Honour accepted that Security were not present when the first fight broke out in the front bar however at least one security guard entered the bar where the injured patron was lying on the floor.
  • Her Honour accepted the security guard's evidence that he made enquiries of other patrons in order to identify the assailant. Her Honour accepted the security guards attempted to escort the alleged assailant from the premises however this appeared to have been ineffectual as the individual re-entered the Hotel.
  • Her Honour accepted the plaintiff as a witness of credit. Her Honour found the security guard who firstly attended the front bar after the fight was an inarticulate witness who appeared "to be of an islander background" (the relevance of which was not explained).
  • Her Honour essentially held there were clearly patrons who had been refused service of alcohol and who had engaged in violent behaviour. Her Honour made a finding that the bar attendant should have informed Security that she had refused service of alcohol to patrons who appeared to be drunk. In such circumstances, it was foreseeable that an injury such as the plaintiff's could occur.
  • Her Honour held that, in the case of the statutory duty, breach of the duty coupled with an accident of the type suffered by the plaintiff was enough to justify an inference that the accident was caused by the breach of statutory duty.

Court of Appeal Decision

  • The Court of Appeal was highly critical of Ashford DCJ, holding that her Honour had failed to adequately identify the manner in which the relevant duties of the defendants had been breached. Even if a breach of duty could have been established, the findings of fact made by her Honour failed to establish a causal link between any breach and the plaintiff's injury: per Basten JA, Handley AJA agreeing.
  • It was further held that the factual findings of the trial judge did not ground any liability on the part of the defendants.
  • The court cited with approval Chordas v Bryant (Wellington Pty Limited) (1988) 20 FCR 91 and the recent Court of Appeal decisions of Spedding v Nobles; Spedding v McNally and Wagstaff v Haslan as authority that an occupier of licensed premises may be liable for injury to a patron caused by the deliberate and unlawful act of another patron. This duty depends on the capacity and statutory obligation of the licensee to control conduct on licensed premises under the Liquor Act 1982 (NSW). However the Court emphasised there is no statutory cause of action for breach of the Liquor Act, if such a breach occurred.
  • Security contractors had a duty to ensure the safety of patrons and to take reasonable measures to protect them from foreseeable harm. Those measures included ejecting patrons from whom violent conduct could be reasonably anticipated.
  • The general issue was whether either the security guards or the hotel staff should have taken greater precautions because of an apparent risk of violence of the kind which in fact materialised.
  • Basten JA observed that the Hotel's duty was satisfied by the presence of four security guards on the night in question, a level of staffing which was not challenged by the plaintiff as involving any breach by the Hotel.
  • His Honour pointed out that Ashford J failed to identify what steps the security guards should have taken in order to fulfil their duty. Her Honour failed to address the necessary issues in relation to causation, namely as to how the exercise of reasonable care might have prevented the second fight or contained it away from the plaintiff. Without taking these steps, her Honour's findings as to the liability of Security could not be upheld.
  • Security could have no liability without a finding as to causation and this was simply not open on the findings of fact made by the trial judge.
  • The evidence indicated that, once the assault occurred, the Hotel staff took appropriate steps. The trial judge made a finding that the bar attendant should have informed Security that she had refused service of alcohol to patrons who appeared to be drunk. The implication was that, had Security been informed that people had been refused alcohol, the security guards would either have turned them out of the Hotel or taken other unspecified steps in relation to them. There was however no evidence that the security guards would have evicted patrons because they had been refused alcohol, absent disruptive behaviour. Handley AJA held there was no evidence that the second fight involved persons who had been refused service. Accordingly, the causal link between any such breach of duty on the part of the Hotel staff and the plaintiff's injury was missing.
  • Basten JA held that, consistent with the approach taken by the High Court in Chappel v. Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232, "…a causal connection between breach and injury remains an essential element of the tort of negligence, to be proved by the plaintiff…".
  • Accordingly, the evidence had failed to demonstrate relevant breaches which might have a causal connection with the injuries suffered. The plaintiff was not entitled to a second trial to attempt to make good the lack of such evidence.
  • Tobias JA agreed that the primary judge's findings of liability could not stand given her imprecise factual findings. In dissenting, his Honour, however, considered there was a breach of duty on the part of either or both defendants which had caused injury to the plaintiff and that a new trial on the issue of liability and contribution should be held.
  • Accordingly, the defendants' appeal was successful.


  • This decision is consistent with the approach taken by the Court of Appeal recently in Spedding v Nobles; Spedding v McNally and Wagstaff v Haslan both being 2007 Court of Appeal decisions. The plaintiffs in McNally succeeded as that was a case where there was the necessary element of control on the part of the hotel licensee which the evidence indicated could have prevented the assault on the plaintiff.
  • The same principles were applied with a different outcome by the Court of Appeal in Wagstaff v Haslan earlier this year where the Court of Appeal found the hotel staff had acted reasonably and that, whilst it was foreseeable that some people would become aggressive when drunk, it did not follow that a publican must treat every intoxicated patron as a potential source of unprovoked violence. By contrast, in McNally the bar manager had been notified of an earlier assault on one of the plaintiffs.
  • The decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court in Chordas v Bryant (Wellington Pty Limited) (1988) 20 FCR 91 has now been referred to with approval in a number of appellate decisions in New South Wales in respect of the duty of care owed by the occupier of licensed premises to patrons who are assaulted by third parties on the premises, and remains good law.
  • The Court reaffirmed the statement of the Full Court in Chordas that there is no statutory cause of action for a breach of the Liquor Act. Rather the relevant duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of patrons depends upon proof that the hotel manager or licensee knew or ought to have known of facts requiring intervention to protect patrons and, in those circumstances, failed to take reasonable steps to safeguard the plaintiff from the foreseeable risk of harm: see generally Wagstaff v Haslam [2007] NSWCA 28.

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.