Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle v AA

(2025) 117 NSWLR 253; [2025] NSWCA 72

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Negligence
2. › Historical sexual assault
3. › Fact-finding process
4. › Inconsistencies in plaintiff's account
5. › Whether primary judge sufficiently addressed inconsistencies
6. › Whether removal of limitation period alters obligation to establish elements of cause of action
7. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 140
1. Negligence
2. › Duty of care
3. › Historical sexual assault by priest
4. › Knowledge of risk
5. › Whether defendant owed duty of care in 1969
6. › Whether knowledge of individual priest imputed to diocese
7. › Whether evidence established foreseeability of harm
8. › Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), Pt 1B
1. Negligence
2. › Non-delegable duties
3. › Intentional criminal acts
4. › Whether non-delegable duty extends to intentional criminal acts of delegate
5. › Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), s 5Q
1. Negligence
2. › Juristic nature of defendant
3. › Unincorporated religious body
4. › Proper defendant under Part 1B of Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)
5. › Imputation of knowledge
6. › Whether knowledge of parish priest imputed to diocese

Quick Take

In historical sexual assault claims against religious organisations, the removal of limitation periods does not alter the Briginshaw standard or relieve a plaintiff of the obligation to establish all elements of the cause of action including foreseeability of risk at the time of the alleged breach; knowledge of an individual parish priest is not imputed to the diocese absent a duty to communicate; and the prospective-only operation of Part 1B of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) is a powerful consideration against retrospective imposition of a novel duty of care.