Spence v State of Queensland

The case of *Spence v State of Queensland* concerned a dispute between Mr. Spence and the State of Queensland. The matter came before Gageler J of the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the State of Queensland had breached its duty of care to Mr. Spence, a prisoner, by failing to take reasonable steps to protect him from a serious risk of harm from other inmates. Specifically, the Court had to consider the scope of the duty of care owed by a jailer to a prisoner, and whether the State's actions or omissions in managing the prison environment met the standard of reasonable care.

Gageler J reasoned that the duty of care owed by a jailer to a prisoner extends to taking reasonable steps to protect them from foreseeable risks of harm, including those posed by other inmates. His Honour found that the State had failed to discharge this duty. The evidence demonstrated that the State was aware of a serious and persistent risk of violence directed at Mr. Spence by other prisoners, and that it had failed to implement adequate measures to mitigate this risk. The Court applied the principles of negligence, focusing on the foreseeability of harm and the reasonableness of the steps taken (or not taken) by the State to prevent it.

The Court found in favour of Mr. Spence, holding the State of Queensland liable for breach of its duty of care.