Jausnik v Nominal Defendant (No 5)

In the case of Jausnik v Nominal Defendant (No 5), the plaintiff, Ms Jausnik, sought compensation for psychiatric injury sustained as a result of witnessing an accident caused by a police pursuit that crossed the border from New South Wales into the Australian Capital Territory. The defendant, the State of New South Wales, was held liable for the negligence of its police officers, who failed to adhere to established protocols during the pursuit. The court had to address whether the State of New South Wales and the police officers were liable for Ms Jausnik's injuries, and if so, whether the State could seek statutory contribution from the ACT for the conduct of its police officers.

The primary legal issues were whether the State of New South Wales was liable for the injuries sustained by Ms Jausnik due to the failure to provide adequate training and whether the police officers were negligent in their handling of the pursuit. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate statutory contribution between the parties under the relevant legislation, particularly in light of the accident occurring in the ACT following the pursuit from New South Wales. The court also needed to resolve whether the causation of Ms Jausnik's injuries was established on the balance of probabilities.

The court held that the State of New South Wales was liable for the injuries sustained by Ms Jausnik due to the failure to provide adequate training and protocols for police pursuits. However, it found that the police officers were not negligent as it was not established on the balance of probabilities that the accident would not have occurred if the pursuit had been terminated earlier. The court also determined that the ACT legislation on statutory contribution did not apply extraterritorially, and therefore, the State of New South Wales could not seek contribution from the ACT. The court concluded that the causation of Ms Jausnik's injuries was not proved on the balance of probabilities.

The court ordered that the State of New South Wales was liable for Ms Jausnik's injuries, but the police officers were not. The court also ruled that the State of New South Wales could not seek statutory contribution from the ACT. The final order was to dismiss the claim for contribution by the ACT Nominal Defendant against the State of New South Wales and the police officers.