State of Victoria v Sutton

The High Court of Australia considered the appeal by the State of Victoria against a decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal concerning the interpretation of section 137 of the *Constitution Act 1975* (Vic). The dispute arose from a claim brought by Mr Sutton against the State of Victoria, alleging that the State had breached its duty of care in failing to prevent the escape of a prisoner who subsequently assaulted Mr Sutton. The Victorian Court of Appeal had found that section 137 of the *Constitution Act 1975* (Vic) did not preclude Mr Sutton's claim.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether section 137 of the *Constitution Act 1975* (Vic), which states that "no person shall be deprived of his liberty except by the law of Victoria," had the effect of preventing a claim for damages against the State for negligence in circumstances where the alleged negligence related to the deprivation of liberty of another person. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the section imposed a limitation on the common law right to sue for negligence in such situations.

The High Court, by majority, held that section 137 of the *Constitution Act 1975* (Vic) was concerned with the legality of the deprivation of liberty itself, not with the consequences that might flow from unlawful deprivation of liberty or from negligence in the administration of the justice system. The Court reasoned that the section did not create a cause of action or a defence, but rather established a fundamental right against unlawful detention. Therefore, it did not operate to prevent Mr Sutton from pursuing his common law claim in negligence against the State of Victoria. The appeal was dismissed.