Tilden v Gregg

The appellant, Tilden, brought proceedings against the first respondent, Gregg, for assault, and against the second respondent, the licensee of the premises where the assault occurred, for negligence. The dispute concerned whether the second respondent owed a duty of care to the appellant and, if so, whether that duty was breached by failing to take certain precautions. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the second respondent was negligent in failing to inform its staff of any need for increased supervision of the first respondent, and whether the second respondent was negligent in failing to install a CCTV camera on the premises. Additionally, the court considered whether the primary judge erred in assessing the appellant's damages for the assault, specifically in not accepting the appellant's evidence regarding the extent of his injury and in not awarding aggravated and exemplary damages.

The Court of Appeal found that the second respondent did not breach its duty of care to the appellant. The court reasoned that there was no evidence to suggest that the second respondent knew or ought to have known that the first respondent posed a risk of assault to other patrons, or that increased supervision was required. Furthermore, the court held that the failure to install a CCTV camera was not causative of the appellant's injuries, as it was unlikely that such a measure would have prevented the assault. Regarding damages, the court found no error in the primary judge's assessment of the appellant's injuries or in the decision not to award aggravated and exemplary damages.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the first respondent's reasonably incurred disbursements and expenses as a litigant in person, and to pay the second respondent's costs of the appeal.