Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 27 APRIL 2022

DP v Bird: is vicarious liability on the move in historical abuse proceedings?

Ramifications of recent case upon the law of vicarious liability, specifically in historical abuse proceedings

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Abstract

DP (a pseudonym) v Bird 1 is a Victorian Supreme Court decision of J Forrest J (Forrest J) handed down on 21 December 2021.

This decision is of interest for a number of reasons including the overall quantum awarded, the award of aggravated damages, and the failure of the Plaintiff's case in negligence. This article will focus on its ramifications upon the law of vicarious liability, specifically the availability of such a finding in historical abuse proceedings and what, if any, tension exists between this decision and the earlier 2021 decision of the Victorian Supreme Court in PCB v Geelong College.2

Introduction and background

The Plaintiff (DP) alleges that he was sexually abused by Father Coffey (Coffey), a priest incardinated within the Diocese of Ballarat (the Diocese), on two occasions in 1971. The alleged abuse, on both occasions, occurred at DP's family home. At the time of the alleged abuse, Coffey was the assistant parish priest to Father

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from