Smoke alarms, unsafe premises and the law

March 2000

Current legislation requires that all residential dwellings should have been fitted with a smoke alarm by January 1 2000.

Steve Palyga, litigation specialist at lawyers Lynch & Meyer, reports on the potential liability of landlords, owners of publicly accessible buildings, and even homeowners.

Obviously, preventing tragedy is a very good reason to install a smoke alarm in a dwelling, but there is another reason in that landlords are probably liable for any death or injury caused because a home does not have a smoke alarm installed.

Owners of publicly accessible premises (such as theatres, business premises, civic centres, malls, shops and schools) probably have similar responsibilities.

The High Court recently said that, generally, landlords have a duty to tenants and their families to keep rented homes in a safe state. This suggests they must ensure their rental homes have smoke detectors.

The High Court case concerned the tragic electrocution of a young girl due to faulty electrical wiring. She suffered permanent brain damage. The court awarded over $1.2 million.

Also, if building rules Australian Standards change so that safety items become compulsory for new homes, then landlords are probably liable if they don't promptly install them in existing homes.

This would apply to smoke alarms, which became compulsory for new homes in 1995.

Now that alarms are required to be fitted in all residential dwellings, there will also be a good legal argument that any death or injury caused or contributed to by the absence of a smoke alarm will be actionable as a breach of statutory duty and negligence.