The Treasurer in and for the State of New South Wales v Wade; the Treasurer in and for the State of New South Wales v Dukes

The Treasurer in and for the State of New South Wales (the Treasurer) appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales that had found in favour of the respondents, Wade and Dukes. The dispute concerned the Treasurer's liability for damages arising from the alleged wrongful detention of goods seized under the *Crimes (Confiscation of Profits) Act 1985* (NSW). The respondents claimed that the Treasurer had failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the goods were preserved and protected from deterioration, leading to a loss in their value.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the Treasurer owed a duty of care to the owners of the seized goods to preserve them from deterioration, and if so, whether that duty had been breached. The Court was required to consider the scope of the Treasurer's obligations under the *Crimes (Confiscation of Profits) Act 1985* and the common law principles of negligence in the context of the seizure and detention of property.

The Court of Appeal held that the Treasurer did not owe a duty of care to the respondents to preserve the seized goods from deterioration. The Court reasoned that the *Crimes (Confiscation of Profits) Act 1985* provided a comprehensive statutory scheme for the management and disposal of forfeited property, and that the Act did not impose a positive duty on the Treasurer to take steps to prevent deterioration. Furthermore, the Court found that the common law duty of care did not extend to requiring the Treasurer to take such measures, as the seizure of the goods was undertaken in the public interest pursuant to statutory powers, and the Act did not contemplate the Treasurer acting as a bailee for reward or otherwise assuming responsibility for the preservation of the goods' value. The appeals were therefore allowed.