State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Chu

The State Rail Authority of New South Wales (SRA) appealed a decision of the District Court of New South Wales, which had awarded damages to Ms. Chu for injuries sustained when she was sexually assaulted on a train. Ms. Chu had been employed by the SRA and was travelling to a work-related function when the assault occurred. The primary dispute concerned whether the SRA was liable for the subsequent sexual assault, and if so, the extent of damages recoverable.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the SRA owed a duty of care to Ms. Chu that extended to protecting her from the sexual assault, and if so, whether the assault constituted a *novus actus interveniens* (a new intervening act) that broke the chain of causation between any breach of duty by the SRA and Ms. Chu's injuries. The court also considered the assessment of damages in light of the intervening assault.

Hodgson JA, with whom Bell JA and Mathews AJ agreed, found that the SRA had breached its duty of care to Ms. Chu by failing to take reasonable steps to prevent the assault. However, the court held that the sexual assault was a *novus actus interveniens* that broke the chain of causation in relation to the injuries directly caused by the assault itself. Despite this, the court determined that the SRA remained liable for the injuries Ms. Chu suffered prior to the assault, including psychological harm resulting from the breach of duty. The damages were recalculated to reflect this distinction.

The appeal was allowed in part, and the cross-appeal was also allowed in part. The original verdict of $239,405.00 was substituted with a verdict of $217,324.00, effective from 4 April 2007. The SRA was ordered to pay 90% of Ms. Chu's costs for the appeal and cross-appeal, with Ms. Chu to receive a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act for the remaining portion of her costs.