Are bar staff liable for intoxicated patrons' actions? GSA Hospitality dives into a recent judgment by VIC County Court

Unfortunately, Public Liability claims originating from a patron altercation or assault are common. GSA’s Head Of Claims, Christina Ludovice and Head of Victoria, Tim Wight share their insights and recommendations following the judgment handed down by the Victorian County Court for the incident that occurred in 2018.

The key issues that had to be determined in this case were:

      (a) Whether the Hotel breached its duty by failing to prevent Mr. Sheppard from entering the premises;

      (b) Whether the Hotel breached its duty by continuing to serve Mr. Sheppard alcohol;

      (c) Whether the Hotel breached its duty by failing to intervene in the minute or so prior to the assault.

The claimant was the victim of an unexpected assault that had particularly unfortunate consequences for him. The court found The Hotel did not breach its duty, as outlined below.

• The assailant ought to have been refused entry for being drunk. This argument was unsuccessful because there was no evidence of intoxication when he arrived.
• The assailant should not have been continually served alcohol at the Hotel. This argument was also unsuccessful. The judgment details what is considered reasonable with respect to bar staff monitoring patron intoxication. It is not necessary     for staff to keep a close eye on the behaviour of every individual patron     at the venue.
• Hotel staff could or should have intervened to prevent the assault. The judge found from the CCTV it was not reasonable to expect staff to intervene in the     circumstances, where the assault happened quickly and in a matter of seconds.

In this case, the court found in favour of the Hotel; however, the Insured’s policy would still have incurred legal costs that remain on their claims history.

Furthermore, it remains important for venue staff to be aware of and comply with the Responsible Service of Alcohol (RSA) laws set by each state and territory. Although the court in this case found that the Hotel staff could not have reasonably identified that the assailant was intoxicated, this does not absolve venue operators and staff from their duty of care to take reasonable steps to control the sale of liquor and minimise harm. This includes harm inflicted by other patrons, where the venue is licensed to serve alcohol.

Ultimately, it remains critical that hospitality operators ensure staff and security contractors/labor hire have the appropriate training to ensure that they are in the best possible position to defend any potential claims of negligence or fines that may be imposed by the relevant state or territory due to RSA.

Full verdict here: Van Rullen v Royal Melbourne Hotel & Anor [2024] VCC 1568 (15 October 2024) (austlii.edu.au)

GSA has built a wealth of industry expertise, looking after clients in the Hospitality sector for over 30 years. In this fast-paced business landscape, our clients are guaranteed to work with specialist personnel as well as a dedicated claims team that will ensure they are rigorously defended when required.

For more hospitality best practices and expert advice, contact us.