Dreamworld Theme Park Negligence Case: Duty of Care and Compensation

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the Dreamworld theme park negligence case, focusing on the tragic incident involving the Thunder River Rapids ride. It examines the legal principles of duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages, as applied to the case. The report delves into the facts, highlighting the company's negligence in maintenance, safety protocols, and employee training. It discusses relevant legislation, including the Fatal Injury Act, Local Government Act, and Personal Injuries Act, and analyzes the application of these laws to the case. The report also draws parallels with the case of Condon v Basi to illustrate the concept of duty of care. Furthermore, it explores the role of the Queensland Local Government in ensuring safety and the provisions for compensation to the victims' families. The report concludes with a detailed analysis of the company's liability and the legal consequences of its negligence, emphasizing the psychiatric trauma suffered by the plaintiffs and their claims for compensation.

LAW

Table of Contents
PART 1............................................................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS........................................................................................................3
PART 2............................................................................................................................................5
RULE......................................................................................................................................6
APPLICATION......................................................................................................................7
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................8
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................9
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................10

PART 1
Introduction and Preliminary Investigation
INTRODUCTION
Theme Parks usually is a place where family's go to spend their leisure time. Dreamworld
is a property of the company Ardent Leisure Ltd. Which was acquired by it in 2009. The
organisation operates as a leisure company based in Australia. The company owns around 100
assets in Australia, New Zealand as well as United States 1. The most Known park, perhaps due
to bad reasons is the Dreamworld Theme park located in Queensland, Australia. A incident took
place where four people died and few had to face injuries and mental depression who belonged
to the same Family. There have been various incidents that has taken place previously in a theme
park, but none of those has seen such serious injuries and loss of lives. The current report will
discuss this case which was put in court and the plaintiff was Kim Dorsett being the mother of
Kate and Luke, Simon Araghi being the brother of Roozbeh. The current report will discuss
whether proper duty of care was established by the concerned organisation or not.
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
According to the mentioned case of negligence found in the case scenario of Dreamworld
theme park under which 4 people of the same family namely Roozbeh Araghi, Luke Jonathon
Dorsett, Kate Louise Goodchild and Cindy Low died because of failure in the malfunctioning of
the machine. However, Things went wrong and one of the ride of park also known as thunder
river rapid ride collided and leads to death of all the four people immediately who were sitting in
the ride. Thus, 4 people have not been able to survive in the collision, this has raised several
questions on the safety and regulatory environment of the company as well as its management in
running the operations of the theme park 2.
Dreamworld Theme Park is owned by the company Ardent Leisure Ltd. and it is having
various properties around the world. Series of incidents that took place have suggested that the
theme park that is operated by the company in Australia is at risk and might have to undergo
various kinds of maintenance and development of different machines. This was a major concern
of the Auditors as well and they suggested that the Safety system of the park was compromised
1 Zhang, M., 2010. Tort liabilities and torts law: the new frontier of Chinese legal
horizon. Rich. J. Global L. & Bus., 10, p.415.
2 Goldberg, J.C., 2012. Introduction: Pragmatism and Private Law. Harvard Law
Review, 125(7), pp.1640-1663
3

and had a 46.1% effective rate which was non-compliant to the 75% that was required. Various
incident has also occurred before which lead to dismissal of an employee. The issue was not
taken seriously by the management of Park and despite the fact that auditors has warned about
the safety system of the Park was not up to date and secured. The warning alarms of water tanks
was also not up to date, management altered from sounding the alarm when the pump stopped to
only sounding the alarm when there is “potential risk”. This was also a major mistake that has
proven fatal for the lives of people in the longer run.
Thunder River Rapid Rides had various malfunctions within it and was reported that the
engineer on duty did not shut down the ride due to the company’s policy, which state to only
shut down a ride that has three malfunctions within a 24-hour period, the engineer recommended
to the ride operator that it is safe to operate and can be taken for people. The major issues
associated with the training of the staffs and emergency issues those are misunderstood because
of inappropriate training and cultural issues 3. There are claim for basic common law of
negligence which can be successfully implemented into Dreamworld such as whether defendants
owed a duty of care to the plaintiffs. The concern is basically associated with the claim for
common law negligence which can be successfully made in respects to Ardent leisure limited.
Due to the fact that there is a clear visibility of negligence on the part of management of
the company and theme park, the plaintiff has decided to move court against the company and
have asked for compensation because of the fact that both Kim Dorsett and Simon Araghi has
undergone post-traumatic stress and depression and they do possess the necessary evidence in
the form of documents that they can present in front of the court upon request 4.
Legal principles
In order to make a proper assessment of the case it is essential to make sure that right
kind of principle and legal issues are being made in this regard. There are certain principles those
are arises from the facts mentioned under the case scenario is being given below:
Duty: Under the case of Theme park Dreamworld, the major duty of the owner is to make
proper analysis of the areas and all the essential facts before starting the park. The major legal
consequences of the breach of developing duty of care by the defendant to safeguard the
3 Hoffman, P. and Stephens, B., 2013. International Human Rights Cases Under State Law
and in State Courts. UC Irvine L. Rev., 3, p.9.
4 Gifford, D.G., 2010. Climate Change and the Public Law Model of Torts: Reinvigorating
Judicial Restraint Doctrines. SCL Rev., 62, p.201.
4

deceased plaintiffs are entrants of their premises during the period of time. The circumstance
under which the law of negligence would be taken into account as primary duty which is been
owned to the plaintiffs and hence specific compensation should be given to the deceased family.
Breach: In the case of Dreamworld, the defendant breached that legal duty through
acting in a certain way. Under this situation, the court will see, whether the defendant breached
his duty that a reasonably prudent individual would do under these circumstances. Ardent leisure
limited has been made maximum focused on delivering high priority theme park project but
because of proper analysis, the employee would not perform their role due to lack of training. It
will be lead to the major accidents 5.
Causation: The another principles of negligence is associated with the plaintiff that
would indicate that the defendant’s negligence is actually caused for the accident that has been
seen at the Dreamworld. It has been seen that Thunder River rapids rides was reported to have
two malfunctions. However, the staffs and engineer on duty cannot shut down the ride due to the
company policy. After repairing the second malfunctions, the engineer allows to start the ride
that causes the death of plaintiffs.
Damages: This particular principle needs that the court must be able to provide
compensation to the family members of plaintiffs for their death. According to the compensation
act and health and safety act all the necessary treatments need to be done. The Last assumption
would be that Both Kim Dorsett and Simon Araghi have been experiencing Psychiatric Trauma
and including stress as well as depression after the incident of 25th October 2016. Thus it is
essential to make sure that both are undergoing the traumatic pressure before putting the same in
front of court and claim for necessary compensation for the economic loss that has been
experienced by them after the loss of their loved ones 6.
PART 2
Detailed Analysis and Conclusion
The case as discussed above is related to the collision of rapid ride that takes place within
the Dreamworld and this has led to death of 4 individuals who has come there for the purpose of
leisure, the ride was having various issues like there were problem in the maintenance and safety
5 Strahilevitz, L.J., 2010. Reunifying Privacy Law. California Law Review, pp.2007-2048.
6 Schwartz, P.M. and Peifer, K.N., 2010. Prosser's" Privacy" and the German Right of
Personality: Are Four Privacy Torts Better than One Unitary Concept?. California Law
Review, pp.1925-1987.
5

conditions of the ride and people from time to time has warned company and its management
like auditors, attraction supervisor etc. But the company ignored the same on a consistent basis
which leads to a serious accident and that has caused the death of 4 People and their families
have suffered various Psychiatric Trauma. Usually, there are provision for giving necessary
compensation as well as damages to be effectively give to the family members of deceased
individuals.
RULE
The relevant Laws in the case is Fatal Injury Act. 1974, Local Government Act. 2008 and
Personal Injuries Act. 2003. Which contains the provisions related to compensation that can be
awarded to family members of the deceased or the injured person. The provisions also relate to
whether the family members are the correct people to receive the compensation for the incident
or not. There are various factors that have to be considered in an appropriate manner by the
court, before making necessary decisions related to the case 7.
Under the current case it is quite evident at every point that there was negligence on the
part of company and management of Ardent Leisure Ltd. Thus, this has created various kinds of
problems in the machinery of Dreamworld Theme Park, and they have not been able to
implement the changes and corrective actions that were being recommended by various people
like Attraction Supervisor and Auditor. The various rounds of funding for effective maintenance
and repairs was also put to halt by the company which was also a big negligence on the part of
company.
Relevant case: CONDON V BASI: CA 30 APR 1985
Under this particular case, parties are playing football. The plaintiffs executed a late
unsafe and foul tackle on the plaintiff breaking his leg. At that particular point of time, defendant
was sent off and the plaintiff was sued for this case of negligence that causes personal injury to
the player 8.
Held: It has been seen that those who are taking part in the competitive sports are still owned a
duty of care to other taking part with them. In case a player fell down the normal and expected
standards then he should be held liable. There was a noticeable breach of the offender duty of
7 Xinbao, Z. and Yepeng, Y., 2012. Compensation Fund of Mass Torts: Its Basic Principle
and Institutional Structure [J]. Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University of
Political Science and Law), 1, p.017.
8 Nicola, F.G., 2012. Intimate Liability: Emotional Harm, Family Law, and Stereotyped
Narratives in Interspousal Torts. Wm. & Mary J. Women & L., 19, p.445.
6

care because he showed a reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s safety and his conduct lies down
below the standards. henceforth, there will be of course a huge degree of care needed of a player
and the guilty person was overruled under this case situation.
Role of Queensland Local Government
The local Government Act has laid down the provision which relates to the concerned
local government that what actions shall be initiated against the property where the incident has
taken place and what actions needs to be taken against the local management who were
responsible for not letting the accident or incident happen. Thus it can be said that the ultimate
role of the local government is quite huge and they shall implement the regulations of the
regulations of the government act effectively into all the properties of the local area in an
efficient way.
The government is responsible to make sure that right kind of plans are being
implemented that will ensure security of its citizens and there are no such properties which can
cause harm or can cause any kind of economic or social loss to individuals or the families of
individuals in any manner 9. They are also responsible to make sure that in case any fault has
been seen in the properties, they shall advise the property owner to correct the same otherwise
necessary actions can be taken in this regard against the owner. The direct responsibility of
government cannot be ignored within the current case. But ultimately the government has to
make sure that right kind of strategies are being framed at local level so that no hard or damages
can be caused to the innocent citizens in any way.
APPLICATION
The provisions of Compensation act have laid down the various points under which the
family member of the deceased individual is eligible for getting the compensation from the
Defendant, these provisions are as follows:
 The liability to prove that the person or family member has undergone a psychiatric
Condition due to the incident and thus the company is liable to pay the legal
compensation for the same to the family members of the deceased person (Macaulay,
2018).
 Also both individual should prove that they are the legal heirs to receive the
compensation for the accident that has taken place, the court will try to analyse the same
9 Richards, N.M. and Solove, D.J., 2010. Prosser's Privacy Law: A Mixed Legacy. Cal. L.
Rev., 98, p.1887.
7

to ensure that no wrong person will get the benefit of Economic Compensation rewarded
to individuals.
 It shall also be proved that they were not facing any medical trauma before and it is only
because of this incident that their Psychiatric Condition has deteriorated.
The Act also laid down the provisions that in case death of an individual occurs by an
accident, and if such death has taken place due to the wrongful act, neglect or default of the
person who could have created circumstances that could prevent the death of individuals then the
concerned person shall be held liable for the damages to be given to the family members of the
deceased individual 10.
The court may reward following Damages to the aggrieved party in this regard:
 The reasonable expenses of burial as well as cremation of the deceased individual that are
being incurred by the individual who has brought the concerned case in the eye of court.
Thus, If the expenses will be paid by the concerned individual, then only they can he or
she can claim the necessary compensation for the incident that has taken place.
 The reasonable Medical as well as Hospital Expenses that are being paid by the
concerned person can also be awarded by the court.
 If the 4 deceased people would be having any kids, the expenses for their upbringing till
the age of 18 has to be awarded to the caretakers of the same.
CONCLUSION
Thus after having an appropriate discussion in this regard, it can be said that the case is
quite clear and there were various injuries that are being faced by the plaintiff and their family
members. 4 family members of Kim Dorsett and Simon Araghi has died in the case of
Dreamworld incident and this has created also major severe mental depression for the family
members of these individuals who died. Thus it is quite important that they shall be awarded
necessary damages and compensation for the loss of lives of their closed ones and this can make
improvement in the condition of these people. Thus, Ardent Leisure Ltd. Shall ensure that
effective damages and compensation is given to the family members of the people who have
suffered death in their theme park during the ride. The aim of them should be to settle down the
same outside the court and not to put the case in front of court. However, it shall be made sure
that they are satisfied from the compensation awarded in an effective way.
10 Chamallas, M. and Sperino, S.F., 2014. Torts and Civil Rights Law: Migration and
Conflict: Symposium Introduction. Ohio St. LJ, 75, pp.1021-1021.
8

There was a complete negligence on the part of company and despite warning given by
auditor regarding safety mechanism of the theme park was not good enough, the company has
not taken any sorts of initiatives that can prevent the concerned incident to take place over longer
period of time. It is equally important to make sure that right kind of treatment is given to the
family members of people who have deceased in the particular incident.
CONCLUSION
From the above project report, it has been concluded that business law is one of the
effective legal norms that used to guide company as well as parties to take right decision in
coming time. For this purpose, various legal norms and role of government in law making
process is taken into account. Various implication in respect to deal with all kind of issues during
the time of expansion of business is being mentioned positively.
9

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Zhang, M., 2010. Tort liabilities and torts law: the new frontier of Chinese legal horizon. Rich. J.
Global L. & Bus., 10, p.415.
Goldberg, J.C., 2012. Introduction: Pragmatism and Private Law. Harvard Law Review, 125(7),
pp.1640-1663.
Hoffman, P. and Stephens, B., 2013. International Human Rights Cases Under State Law and in
State Courts. UC Irvine L. Rev., 3, p.9.
Gifford, D.G., 2010. Climate Change and the Public Law Model of Torts: Reinvigorating
Judicial Restraint Doctrines. SCL Rev., 62, p.201.
Strahilevitz, L.J., 2010. Reunifying Privacy Law. California Law Review, pp.2007-2048.
Schwartz, P.M. and Peifer, K.N., 2010. Prosser's" Privacy" and the German Right of Personality:
Are Four Privacy Torts Better than One Unitary Concept?. California Law Review,
pp.1925-1987.
Xinbao, Z. and Yepeng, Y., 2012. Compensation Fund of Mass Torts: Its Basic Principle and
Institutional Structure [J]. Science of Law (Journal of Northwest University of Political
Science and Law), 1, p.017.
Nicola, F.G., 2012. Intimate Liability: Emotional Harm, Family Law, and Stereotyped Narratives
in Interspousal Torts. Wm. & Mary J. Women & L., 19, p.445.
Richards, N.M. and Solove, D.J., 2010. Prosser's Privacy Law: A Mixed Legacy. Cal. L.
Rev., 98, p.1887.
Chamallas, M. and Sperino, S.F., 2014. Torts and Civil Rights Law: Migration and Conflict:
Symposium Introduction. Ohio St. LJ, 75, pp.1021-1021.
Online
Alternative solution. 2018.[Online]. Available through: <https://www.whanganui.govt.nz/our-
services/building-consents-and-information/Documents/Brochure003-
AlternativeSolutions.pdf>.
10