Enever v the King

The plaintiff, Enever, brought an action against the Crown for damages for wrongful arrest. The dispute concerned the liability of the Crown for the actions of a police officer. The case was heard by the High Court of Australia, comprising Griffith C.J., Barton and O'Connor JJ.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether a police officer, acting in the course of their duties, was an agent or servant of the Crown for the purposes of establishing Crown liability under the Crown Redress Act 1891. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the Crown could be held responsible for the tortious acts of a police officer, such as wrongful arrest, committed while exercising powers conferred by legislation like the Police Act 1865 and the Police Act 1898.

The Court reasoned that the relationship between the Crown and police officers was not one of employment or agency in the ordinary sense. While police officers were appointed and paid by the Crown, their powers and duties were primarily derived from statute, and they were expected to exercise an independent discretion in carrying out their functions. The Court held that the Crown was not liable for the wrongful acts of a police officer unless it could be shown that the Crown had directed or authorised the specific wrongful act, or that the officer was acting as the Crown's agent in a particular instance. The principle applied was that the Crown is not vicariously liable for the torts of its servants or agents unless the relationship is akin to that of employer and employee, which was not the case with police officers in their exercise of statutory powers.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Crown was not liable for the wrongful arrest by the police officer.