Commonwealth of Australia v Hansen

The Commonwealth of Australia appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales concerning the liability of the Commonwealth for the actions of a Commonwealth employee. The dispute arose from a motor vehicle accident in which a Commonwealth employee, driving a Commonwealth vehicle, collided with the respondent, Mr. Hansen. Mr. Hansen subsequently sued the Commonwealth for damages for personal injuries sustained in the accident.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Commonwealth was vicariously liable for the negligent driving of its employee. Specifically, the court had to determine if the employee was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the collision, or if his actions constituted a departure from his employment duties for which the Commonwealth would not be liable.

The Court of Appeal, in upholding the Supreme Court's decision, applied the established principles of vicarious liability. The court considered the nature of the employee's duties and the connection between those duties and the act that caused the injury. It was found that the employee's use of the vehicle, even if for a purpose not strictly authorised, was sufficiently incidental to his employment duties to render the Commonwealth vicariously liable. The court emphasised that the relevant test was whether the employee's conduct was so closely connected with what he was employed to do that it could be regarded as an unauthorised mode of doing an authorised act. The appeal was dismissed.