Sneddon v State of New South Wales

The case of *Sneddon v State of New South Wales* involved an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales concerning claims of vicarious liability against the State of New South Wales for the tortious conduct of a Member of Parliament. The appellant, Ms. Sneddon, had brought proceedings against the State and Mr. Orkopoulos, a Member of Parliament, alleging various torts. A default judgment had been entered against Mr. Orkopoulos, but the primary judge had dismissed the claim against the State. The appeal also concerned the requirement for leave to appeal under section 101 of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW), particularly whether the matter at issue amounted to or was of the value of $100,000.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether a Member of Parliament is a "person in the service of the Crown" for the purposes of establishing vicarious liability of the State under the *Law Reform (Vicarious Liability) Act 1983* (NSW), and whether the conduct of the Member of Parliament in question occurred in his capacity as such. Further issues related to the application of *res judicata* and issue estoppel arising from the default judgment against Mr. Orkopoulos, and whether that judgment necessarily determined the specific causes of action against the State. The Court also considered the principles for assessing damages under section 16 of the *Civil Liability Act 2002* (NSW), specifically in circumstances of uncertainty regarding recovery.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Basten, Macfarlan and Meagher JJA, addressed the question of leave to appeal, ultimately dismissing the appellant's application. However, in relation to the proceedings against the State, the Court allowed the appeal in part. It found that the State was vicariously liable for the conduct of Mr. Orkopoulos, setting aside the earlier order dismissing the claim against the State and entering judgment for the appellant against the State in the sum of $438,613.75. The Court also ordered that the State pay the appellant's costs of the trial and 50 per cent of the appellant's costs of the appeal. The appeal against Mr. Orkopoulos was dismissed.