In Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v Anzil [2000] HCA 61 the High Court held that while occupiers owe a duty of care to persons lawfully on its premises, that duty does not extend to taking reasonable care to protect persons from the criminal conduct of third parties. The High Court recognised there may be relationships where such a duty of care was owed.

Victorian and New South Wales courts have recently looked at some of those relationships. It is clear from these decisions that there are exceptions to the Modbury principle which apply to occupiers and employers:

Ogden v Bells Hotel Pty Ltd [2009] VSC 219

Mrs Ogden was the manager of the Bells Hotel and was held up during an armed robbery early one Monday morning when she was opening the Hotel. She sued her employer in negligence alleging it failed to provide her with a safe system of work and claimed compensation for psychiatric and psychological injury. Bells denied it was negligent.

Justice Williams found Bells breached its duty of care to Mrs Ogden in that it did not provide her with a safe system of work. The Court found the robbery perpetrated on Mrs Ogden was predictable. The robber was able to plan the crime, knowing Mrs Ogden's predictable routine on a Monday morning and the likely significant amount of the potential award. Mrs Ogden was vulnerable, lacked training in self protective behaviour and had not been told of any 'two man rule' of entry applying to her or to others.

Further details are available at Mondaq.