← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case duty of carepublic authority liability

Stuart v Kirkland-Veenstra

(2009) 237 CLR 215
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2009
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Police officers owe no common law duty to prevent self-harm absent control over the person; mere knowledge of a risk of self-harm is insufficient to establish a duty of care.

Key Principle

The HCA held that police officers owe no common law duty to prevent a person from self-harm where they have no control over the person; mere knowledge of a risk of self-harm is insufficient to establish a duty of care.

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 Stuart v Kirkland-Veenstra and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Stuart v Kirkland-Veenstra