← All Authorities
Australia duty of carepsychiatric injury

New South Wales v Fahy

(2007) 232 CLR 486
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2007
StatusBinding authority

Summary

An employer (NSW Police) owes a duty of care to an employee for foreseeable psychiatric injury from occupational stress, but the content of that duty is not elevated beyond ordinary negligence principles.

Key Principle

police officer psychiatric injury; foreseeability; employer duty of care for occupational stress

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 New South Wales v Fahy and how it applies to your situation.

Explain New South Wales v Fahy