Sahade v Bischoff

This matter concerned an appeal from a decision of the primary judge in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellants, Sahade and others, appealed against findings made by the primary judge concerning alleged assaults by the respondent, Bischoff, and the application of the defence of self-defence under section 52 of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW). The appellants also appealed against findings relating to malicious prosecution, alleging the respondent instigated and maintained a prosecution by making deliberately false statements to police and giving false evidence at a criminal trial, supported by CCTV footage. Finally, the appellants sought leave to appeal an award of general damages for trespass, arguing the primary judge erred in assessing the quantum and in refusing to award aggravated and exemplary damages.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge’s factual findings regarding the alleged assaults were erroneous. It also had to consider whether the primary judge correctly applied the test and onus for self-defence under section 52 of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW). Further issues included whether the respondent instigated or maintained a prosecution by making deliberately false statements to police and giving false evidence, and whether the primary judge erred in awarding general damages of $500 for trespass, and if circumstances justified a substantial award of general damages, including aggravated and exemplary damages.

The Court of Appeal ultimately dismissed the appeal. While granting leave to the appellants to file an amended notice of appeal, it refused leave to file an amended cross-summons and dismissed the cross-summons for leave to cross-appeal. All questions of costs were reserved, with directions given for the parties to file submissions and proposed orders regarding costs.