Sittrop v State of Victoria (Ruling No 2)

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, Sittrop brought an action against the State of Victoria, seeking damages for psychiatric injury sustained due to the alleged negligence of the police. The plaintiff contended that the police failed to protect him from harm, which resulted in the psychiatric injury. The defendant moved to have the proceedings struck out on the basis that no duty of care was owed by the police to the plaintiff.

The court was required to determine whether the police owed a duty of care to the plaintiff in the circumstances of the case, and if so, whether the alleged breach of that duty caused the plaintiff's psychiatric injury. The key issue was whether the police had a legal obligation to protect the plaintiff from harm and, if they did, whether their failure to do so breached that duty and led to the plaintiff's injury. The court also needed to consider the scope of any duty of care that might be owed and whether the circumstances of the case fell within that scope.

The court held that the police did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff in the circumstances of the case. The court found that the police did not have a special relationship with the plaintiff that would give rise to a duty of care. Furthermore, the court held that even if a duty of care was owed, the alleged breach of that duty did not cause the plaintiff's psychiatric injury. The court found that the plaintiff's injury was not a foreseeable consequence of the police's actions or inactions. Accordingly, the court granted the defendant's motion to strike out the proceedings.

The court ordered that the plaintiff's action be struck out with costs to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant. The court found that the defendant was entitled to costs on the standard basis. The court also made an order that the plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of the strike out application, which were assessed at $20,000.