After suffering injury in the collision and receiving outpatient treatment Thomas then went home to rest. While at home, Thomas receives a call from the manager of his shop located in downtown Sydney that two individuals have been injured while in the premises - one individual was a paying customer of the shop while the other individual was merely passing through the premises while enroute to school. Both individuals are now looking to claim against Thomas' business for injuries suffered in the premises and Thomas' manager would like to understand whether there is any difference in the level of duty of care owed to the individual who was a paying customer versus the other individual who was merely passing through the premises.

Does Thomas' business owe a higher duty of care to the individual who was a paying customer in comparison to the other individual who was merely passing through? If you think that a contractual entrant is owed a higher duty of care, or a non-contractual entrant is owed a lower duty of care, explain why. Please make reference to Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd v Zaluzna [1987] HCA 7

Using IRAC