Jennings v Police

Jennings appealed to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia against a decision of a single judge. The dispute concerned the alleged negligence of the Police Commissioner in failing to adequately supervise and control a police officer who, while on duty, assaulted the appellant. The appellant sought damages for personal injury.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the Police Commissioner owed a duty of care to members of the public, such as the appellant, to take reasonable steps to prevent a police officer from assaulting them while on duty. This involved considering the nature of the relationship between the public and the police, and whether it gave rise to a special duty of care beyond that owed by ordinary employers to their employees.

The Court held that the Commissioner did not owe a duty of care to the appellant in the circumstances. It reasoned that while police officers are employees of the Crown, the relationship between the police force and the public is not one that gives rise to a novel duty of care for the tortious acts of individual officers. The Court distinguished this situation from cases where a duty of care might arise from a special relationship, such as a duty owed by a school to its students or a hospital to its patients. The Court found that the existing legal framework, including criminal and disciplinary sanctions, was sufficient to address the conduct of errant police officers, and that imposing a general duty of care on the Commissioner in this context would be an unwarranted extension of the law of negligence.

The appeal was dismissed.