Leeton Aerial AG Pty Ltd v Hardy Irrigation Pty. Ltd.

2025/00394518

TORTS (negligence) – the respondent operated cotton farms which it regularly sprayed with herbicides – the respondent would occasionally retain the appellants to conduct aerial crop-dusting of the cotton crops with the herbicide “Weedmaster” – the first appellant would enter into contracts to do crop-dusting – the second appellant, which is a related company to the first, owned and operated the aircraft used to do the spraying – in November 2022, the appellants conducted such a crop-dusting – shortly after, the respondent alleged that the dusted fields became severely damaged by virtue of the Weedmaster used in the dusting being mixed with the highly toxic pesticide, 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), a substance not usually present in Weedmaster – the Weedmaster was delivered in an intermediate bulk container to the appellants’ hangar, there placed into a mixing trough, mixed with water then pumped into the appellants’ plane ready for dusting – the respondent commenced proceedings against the appellants claiming damages for the damage allegedly caused to the cotton crops – it was neither party’s case that the herbicide arrived at the appellants’ hangar already contaminated – the primary judge found by inference that at some point between the delivery of the Weedmaster and the loading of the herbicide onto the plane, the appellants mistakenly contaminated the herbicide with 2,4-D – the primary judge held that the first appellant was liable for breach of contract and both appellants were liable under ss 10 and 11 of the Damage by Aircraft Act 1999 (Cth) – the primary judge ordered damages for the respondent in the amount of $673,518.14, inclusive of interest – whether the primary judge erred in drawing an inference that the appellants mistakenly loaded contaminated Weedmaster onto their plane which they subsequently sprayed onto the respondent’s fields.

Hardy Irrigation Pty Ltd v Leeton Aerial Ag Pty Ltd [2025] NSWDC 389