State of New South Wales v Cullen

The Court of Appeal of New South Wales heard an appeal in the matter of *State of New South Wales v Cullen*. The dispute concerned the liability of the State of New South Wales for alleged negligence in its supervision of a former police officer, Mr. Cullen, who was convicted of serious criminal offences. The State sought to appeal a decision that found it liable for damages suffered by victims of Mr. Cullen's criminal conduct.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the State owed a duty of care to the victims of Mr. Cullen's criminal acts, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the State's knowledge of Mr. Cullen's propensity for violence and its failure to adequately supervise or control him gave rise to a cause of action in negligence for the harm caused by his subsequent criminal behaviour. The Court also considered the scope of the duty of care owed by a public authority in relation to the conduct of its employees.

The Court of Appeal found that the State did not owe a duty of care to the victims in the circumstances of this case. The Court reasoned that while the State has a general duty to act reasonably in the supervision of its employees, this duty does not extend to preventing all foreseeable criminal acts by those employees, particularly where the criminal acts are of a kind that are not closely connected to the employee's duties or the State's supervision. The Court distinguished this case from situations where a public authority's negligence directly causes harm, or where the authority has assumed a specific responsibility for the safety of others. The Court applied principles of proximity and foreseeability in determining the existence and scope of the duty of care, concluding that the causal link between the State's alleged negligence and the victims' injuries was too remote.

The appeal was allowed, and the judgment in favour of the victims was set aside.