Kozarov v State of Victoria

The High Court of Australia considered the appeal in *Kozarov v State of Victoria*. The dispute concerned the State of Victoria's liability for alleged breaches of duty of care owed to the appellant, who suffered harm as a result of a serious sexual assault by a prisoner who had been released on parole. The appellant contended that the State, through its correctional and parole authorities, failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the assault.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the State owed a duty of care to the appellant, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether the common law duty of care, which generally does not extend to preventing harm caused by the independent criminal acts of third parties, could be engaged in the circumstances of this case. This involved considering the scope of the duty of care owed by public authorities and the foreseeability of the harm that occurred.

The High Court ultimately held that the State of Victoria did not owe a duty of care to the appellant in this instance. The majority reasoned that the harm suffered by the appellant was not of a kind that was reasonably foreseeable as a consequence of the State's actions or omissions in relation to the prisoner's parole. The Court affirmed the general principle that a duty of care does not typically arise to prevent the criminal acts of third parties, and that exceptional circumstances required to displace this principle were not present. The Court found that the State's functions in managing prisoners and parolees did not create a sufficient proximity or a sufficiently direct causal link between the State's conduct and the appellant's injuries to establish a duty of care.

The appeal was dismissed.