Damages – Exemplary damages – Where appellants exposed to CS gas at youth detention centre – Where High Court held in Binsaris v Northern Territory (2020) 270 CLR 549 that spraying of CS gas constituted unlawful battery of appellants – Where High Court remitted matter to Supreme Court of Northern Territory for assessment of damages – Whether exemplary damages should be awarded – Whether Court of Appeal of Supreme Court of Northern Territory failed to execute judgment of High Court in accordance with s 37 of Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – Whether Court of Appeal erred in approach to exemplary damages – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that it was not open to assessing judge to award exemplary damages on direct liability basis – Whether award of $200,000 to each appellant for exemplary damages manifestly excessive – Whether pre-judgment interest should be awarded on general damages.
Words and phrases – "aggravated damages", "assessment of damages", "attribution", "battery", "bystanders", "care, control, and custody", "conscious wrongdoing", "contumelious disregard", "damages", "defence of lawful authority", "denunciation", "deterrence", "direct liability", "discretion", "doctrine of finality", "exemplary damages", "fact-finding", "general damages", "lawful authority", "lawful option", "manifestly excessive", "moral retribution", "parity", "pleaded case", "pre-judgment interest", "proportionality", "proportionate punishment", "reasonable and necessary", "remitter", "reprehensible conduct", "state of mind", "systems and training", "tort of battery", "tortious conduct", "totality", "unlawful", "vicarious liability".
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), s 37.
Supreme Court Act 1979 (NT), s 84.
Weapons Control Act 2001 (NT), ss 6, 12(2).
Youth Justice Act 2005 (NT), ss 151, 152(1), 153, 157(2).