Chan v Acres  NSWSC 1885Authors: Katherine Allsop and Simon Lusk
In the wake of Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 and another  HCA 36, this case revisits the issue of what makes a plaintiff sufficiently vulnerable to the acts or omissions by a defendant for a court to impose a duty of care to avoid causing the plaintiff economic loss. It is clear from this case that the court must look at all the salient features of the relationship between the parties, with a focus on vulnerability, before it can determine if such a duty exists. In this case, the existence of known reliance by the plaintiff and the assumption of responsibility by the defendant were key features on which the court relied to impose such a duty.
Significant cases, legislation or articles referred to:
- Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 and another  HCA 36
- Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)
- Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) s.18B
- Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609
- Woolcock Street Investments Pty Ltd v CDG Pty Ltd (2004) 216 CLR 515