Wicks and Sheehan v State Rail Authority: Yet Another Public Policy Dilemma

Abstract

In Wicks v State Rail Authority of New South Wales; Sheehan v State Rail Authority of New South Wales [2010] HCA 22, the Australian High Court grappled with provisions of New South Wales legislation limiting claims for damages for mental harm. The Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) limits claims by plaintiffs for damages for pure mental harm, resulting from harm to another person, which in turn was caused by the defendant. The creation of this restriction was one of a number of tort reforms passed by parliaments around Australia. The High Court's consideration of the case highlights the difficult policy questions involved in determining liability for psychiatric injury. The decision also demonstrates that Australia does not have a coherent national approach to claims for damages for pure mental harm resulting from negligence.

Key words:

• civil liability
• damages
• duty of care
• Ipp Report
• negligence
• mental harm
• post-traumatic stress disorder
• psychiatric injury
• statutory interpretation
• tort

Notes

 1. Law of Negligence Review Panel & DA Ipp, Review of the Law of Negligence: Final Report (2002) < http://revofneg.treasury.gov.au/content/reports.asp> accessed 23 July 2010.

 2. See, for example: I Freckelton, ‘Compensability for Suicide: A Causation Dilemma’ (2009) 16(S1) PPL S1–S12; J Townsend, ‘Gray v Thames Trains: Another Causation Dilemma’ (2009) 16(3) PPL 333–39.

 3. See the Ipp Report (n 1)135–49.

 4. Final Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Waterfall Rail Accident (2003) < http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/inquiries/waterfall.html> accessed 26 July 2010.

 5. [2004] NSWSC 725 at [68].

 6. (1961) 106 CLR 112.

 7. [1999] 2 AC 455.

 8. (2002) 211 CLR 317.

 9. See, for example, Blaxter v Commonwealth of Australia [2008] NSWCA 87; and Metcalfe v Commonwealth of Australia [2008] VSCA 23.

10. See Gifford v Strang Patrick Stevedoring Pty Ltd (2003) 214 CLR 269; Gifford v Strang Patrick Stevedoring Pty Ltd (2001) 51 NSWLR 606.

11. (1939) 62 CLR 1.

12. [1943] AC 92.

13. (1988) 44 FCR 20.

14. [1925] 1 KB 141.

15. Ipp Report (n 1) 141.

16. Ipp Report (n 1) 141.

17. D Mendelson, ‘Modern Australian Law of Mental Harm: Parochialism Triumphant’ (2005) 13(2) Journal of Law and Medicine 164, 172.

18. Mendelson (n 17) 172.

19. B Debus, ‘Tort Law Reform in New South Wales: State and Federal Interactions’ (2002) 25(3) UNSWLJ 825, 827.

20. B McDonald, ‘Legislative Intervention in the Law of Negligence: The Common Law, Statutory Interpretation and Tort Reform in Australia’ (2005) 27 Sydney Law Review 443, 444.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Joel Townsend

The views expressed in this article are not the views of Victoria Legal Aid.