Stingel v Clark

The appeal concerned a plaintiff who commenced proceedings in the County Court of Victoria in 2002, alleging she had been raped and assaulted by the defendant in 1971 when she was a minor. The plaintiff claimed to have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder of delayed onset, becoming aware of the connection between this disorder and the alleged assaults in 2000. The defendant argued that the action was statute-barred, as the general limitation period of six years for tort actions under section 5(1)(a) of the *Limitation of Actions Act 1958* (Vic) had expired. The High Court of Australia considered the application of section 5(1A) of the Act to extend this limitation period.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether section 5(1A) of the *Limitation of Actions Act 1958* (Vic) applied to the plaintiff's claim, thereby extending the limitation period from the date she first knew of her injuries and their causal connection to the alleged assaults. This required the Court to determine if a trespass to the person constitutes an action for a "breach of duty" within the meaning of the Act, and whether the plaintiff's alleged post-traumatic stress disorder qualified as a "disease or disorder contracted".

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Court of Appeal of Victoria. The Court reasoned that the plaintiff's claim for trespass to the person was not an action for a "breach of duty" as contemplated by section 5(1A) of the Act, nor was the post-traumatic stress disorder a "disease or disorder contracted" in the sense intended by that provision. Consequently, section 5(1A) did not operate to extend the limitation period, and the plaintiff's action was indeed statute-barred. The appeal to the Court of Appeal was therefore dismissed.