Touchline • Issue 18 • 27
Lake Wabby:
The site of
numerous serious injuries
and the focus of discussion
about the use of warning
signs.
was an “obvious risk” within the meaning of section 13 of the
Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld).
The Queensland Court of Appeal noted that the critical
question was whether, in all the circumstances, the signs
effectively communicated the risk which materialised, so as to
make that risk obvious to a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s
position. In concluding that the signs failed to effectively
communicate that risk, the Court noted the following matters:
Visitors continuing to dive into the lake despite the presence
of the signs.
Although the signs conveyed the message that serious
injury might result from “running and diving” into the
lake, they did not indicate that “running or diving” might
result in serious injury. Consequently, the signs did not
effectively communicate that running down the dune
into the lake involved the risk of serious injury which
materialised.
A reasonable person in the plaintiff’s position would
have concluded that running down the sand towards
the lake was dangerous in the sense that it involved a
risk of a sprain due to falling on the sand rather than a
catastrophic injury and this would have been reinforced
by the wording of the second warning.
Before the plaintiff was injured he saw numerous other
people at the lake engaged in a similar activity without
incident.
The respondent himself engaged in that activity on
about 10 occasions without incident.
The video which the plaintiff had seen included
warnings about dangers presented by the topography
of and activities on the Island but it did not indicate
any problem with running down the sand dunes and
jumping into any lake or Lake Wabby in particular.
Consequently, the Queensland Court of Appeal upheld the trial
judge’s finding that the risk was not obvious as the signs did
not adequately state that running down the dune into the lake
involved the risk of serious injury.
© RSMITH80AU, 2009