Tort – Negligence – Duty of care – Scope of duty – Vicarious liability – Public authorities – Police – Crowd control – Protest march – Where police intervened in protest march to prevent risk to public safety – Where appellant injured when knocked to ground during arrest of third party – Whether police owed duty to exercise reasonable care in undertaking crowd control to avoid physical injury to members of crowd and bystanders foreseeably at risk of injury from operational response – Whether duty extends to injury suffered by appellant – Whether breach of duty – Whether police actions unreasonable having regard to apprehended threat to public safety – Whether alternative courses of action reasonable.
Words and phrases –"agony of the moment", "assumed duty", "assumption of responsibility", "breach of duty", "bystander", "careless act", "causation", "criminal acts of others", "crowd control", "duty of care", "flag burning", "foreseeably at risk", "general police liability", "imposed duty", "infringement of rights", "innocent passers-by or bystanders", "level of generality", "melee", "negligence", "physical injury", "police intervention", "police operations", "police services", "positive negligent conduct", "precautions", "profession of particular skill", "protest march", "public safety", "reasonable care", "reasonable foreseeability of risk", "reasonable person", "reasonably foreseeable", "reasonably necessary", "risk of harm", "scope of duty", "scope of liability", "social utility", "standard of care", "statutory function", "threat to public safety", "tool of analysis", "undertaking of responsibility", "vicarious liability".
Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), ss 5B, 5C, 5D.
Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW), ss 4, 198, 199, 200, 230, 231.
Police Act 1990 (NSW), ss 6, 13, 14.