14 December 2017

Negligence: Southland Indoor Leisure v. Invercargill City

A sixteen million dollars damages award against Invercargill City following Southland Indoor Leisure Centre’s catastrophic roof collapse was cut in half by the Supreme Court.  The Leisure Centre itself was partly to blame by not following up on an earlier engineering report.
IAG Insurance paid out when the Leisure Centre roof collapsed in 2010 under weight of snow.  IAG then took legal action in the name of the Leisure Centre against Invercargill City alleging negligence by Council when signing off on construction.  A compliance certificate was issued without checking construction complied with the building code.  The primary cause of the roof collapse was a missing weld in one roof truss; if in place the roof would have held.
Supreme Court judges were split 3-2 over whether the Leisure Centre was partly to blame.  The majority ruled there was contributory negligence.  When the Leisure Centre sought expert engineering advice in 2006 about persistent roof leaks, it also asked for an ‘assessment of the roof … to be certain it is absolutely safe’.  Concerns had been voiced following contemporary media reports of a stadium roof collapse in Poland: 65 died and 170 were injured.  The engineering report recommended truss welds and support fixings be inspected.  No inspection was carried out.  Failure to inspect amounted to contributory negligence, the Court ruled.  An inspection would most likely have identified the problem and seen the roof strengthened.  The Leisure Centre was fifty per cent to blame for the subsequent roof collapse.
Southland Indoor Leisure Centre v. Invercargill City – Supreme Court (14.12.17)

18.021