McHale v Watson

McHale v Watson concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a judgment of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appellant, a young boy, had suffered serious eye injuries when he was struck by a dart thrown by the respondent, a boy aged 12. The appellant's father, acting as his next friend, brought proceedings against the respondent, alleging negligence. The respondent's defence included a plea that he was too young to be held liable for negligence.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether a child of 12 years of age could be held liable for negligence. This required the court to consider the standard of care expected of a child defendant and how that standard differed from that expected of an adult. The court also had to determine whether the respondent's actions, in throwing the dart, fell below the standard of care expected of a reasonable child of his age.

The High Court held that a child defendant is not expected to meet the same standard of care as an adult. Instead, the standard of care applicable to a child is that of a reasonable child of the same age, intelligence, and experience. In this instance, the court found that the respondent, a 12-year-old boy, had not been negligent. The court reasoned that the respondent's actions in throwing the dart, while perhaps careless in hindsight, were not so careless as to be considered negligent when judged by the standard of a reasonable 12-year-old boy. The appeal was therefore dismissed.