State of New South Wales v Seedsman

The Court of Appeal of New South Wales heard an appeal by the State of New South Wales against a judgment awarded to Mr Seedsman. The dispute concerned the appellant's liability in negligence for psychiatric injury suffered by the respondent, a police officer, as a result of his employment.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the appellant owed a duty of care to the respondent to prevent psychiatric injury, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. Specifically, the Court considered whether the foreseeability of psychiatric injury, as opposed to physical injury, was a necessary element in establishing such a duty, and whether the employer's duty to an employee extended to protecting them from psychiatric harm without the need for a "shock" event.

The Court affirmed that an employer owes a duty of care to its employees to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm, and this duty extends to psychiatric injury. It was held that psychiatric injury is not inherently different from physical injury in the context of an employer's duty of care, and the foreseeability of such harm is the key consideration. The Court rejected the notion that a specific "shock" was a prerequisite for establishing liability for psychiatric injury in this context, focusing instead on the objective foreseeability of the risk of harm arising from the nature of the employment and the employer's knowledge or constructive knowledge of the employee's vulnerability.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.