Bennett v Minister of Community Welfare

This matter concerned an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia by Wayne Kenneth Bennett against the Minister of Community Welfare. The core of the dispute revolved around the correct legal approach to causation, particularly in the context of a *novus actus interveniens* (an intervening act that breaks the chain of causation), and the relevance of remoteness of damage principles to this issue.

The legal issues before the High Court were twofold. Firstly, the applicant argued that the trial judge and the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia had erred in their application of a "but for" test to causation, submitting that this test is not exclusive and is particularly unreliable in cases involving an intervening act. Secondly, the applicant contended that the courts below had failed to consider the relevance of principles relating to remoteness of damage when assessing the question of *novus actus interveniens*.

The applicant's submissions highlighted that the trial judge, after acknowledging a 1976 piece of advice as a potential intervening act, applied the "but for" test and found against the plaintiff. The majority in the Full Court, while acknowledging the intervening act, considered the issue foreclosed by the pleadings and did not delve into the principles of responsibility for damage or policy considerations. The applicant argued this was a mischaracterisation of their case. The Court also considered whether the action, though treated as one for damages, might more accurately be characterised as an action in equity for compensation for breach of a fiduciary duty, and whether this distinction would alter the approach to the causation arguments.