Bell v WA

(2004) 28 WAR 555; [2004] WASCA 205

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Tort
2. › Vicarious liability
3. › Crown liability
4. › Whether employer vicariously liable where employee immune from liability under statute
5. › Whether immunity from liability of servant precludes vicarious liability of master
6. › Western Australian Marine Act 1982 (WA), s 124
7. › Crown Suits Act 1947 (WA), s 5
1. Tort
2. › Statutory immunity
3. › Construction of immunity provisions
4. › Whether immunity substantive or procedural
5. › Whether immunity from liability or immunity from suit
6. › Strict construction of immunity provisions
7. › Western Australian Marine Act 1982 (WA), s 124
1. Statutes
2. › Construction
3. › Implied repeal
4. › Whether later statute inconsistent with earlier statute
5. › Presumption against implied repeal
6. › Crown Suits Act 1947 (WA), s 5
7. › Western Australian Marine Act 1982 (WA), s 124
1. Tort
2. › Statutory immunity
3. › Scope of immunity
4. › Whether conduct within exercise or purported exercise of power or discharge of duty under Act
5. › Whether omission or positive act
6. › Whether act integral to statutory function or merely incidental
7. › Western Australian Marine Act 1982 (WA), s 124

Quick Take

Where a government employee is immune from liability under a statutory immunity provision such as s 124 of the Western Australian Marine Act 1982, the State is not vicariously liable for that employee's conduct unless the statute expressly preserves the State's liability. The immunity in s 124 is substantive (immunity from liability) not procedural (immunity from suit). Conduct that is formulated as an omission but forms part of a larger positive act of discharging a statutory function falls within the scope of such immunity provisions.