← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case duty of carecontributory negligence

Miller v Miller

(2011) 242 CLR 446
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2011
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Civil liability legislation barring claims based on illegal activity does not extend to all criminal conduct; a sufficient connection between the illegal conduct and the risk of harm is required.

Key Principle

The HCA held that the civil liability legislation barring claims based on illegal activity does not extend to all criminal conduct; the defence requires a sufficient connection between the illegal conduct and the risk of harm.

Area of Law

tort

Related Cases

Bird v DP (A Pseudonym) (2024) 98 ALJR 486

High Court of Australia held a religious organisation vicariously liable for sexual abuse by a priest, recognising a relationship akin to employment sufficient to ground vicarious liability.

Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd (2023) 278 CLR 99

High Court of Australia held that the peak indebtedness rule does not apply when assessing unfair preferences under s 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Kozarov v Victoria (2022) 275 CLR 115

An employer owes a duty to take reasonable steps to protect an employee from psychiatric injury caused by vicarious trauma, and may breach that duty by failing to act on obvious warning signs.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Miller v Miller and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Miller v Miller