Quintano & 2 Ors v State of NSW & Anor [2002] NSWSC 278

Quintano & 2 Ors v State of NSW & Anor [2002] NSWSC 278

The second defendant's conduct was properly characterised as part of a police investigation, even though no crime had then been committed or reported, because it involved inquiry to ascertain facts and the exercise of police discretion. The authorities established that police owed no duty of care to the plaintiffs in respect of that investigation and had immunity on public policy grounds. The plaintiffs' negligence claim was therefore doomed to fail and the statement of claim was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Negligence Claim Against Police Arising From a Police Investigation for the Recovery of the First Plaintiff's Children / Defendants' Notice of Motion Seeking Dismissal Under Part 15 R 26 or Part 13 R 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, or Alternatively Strike Out of the Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Plaintiffs' statement of claim dismissed; plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'duty of Care in Police Investigations' 'common Law Immunity of Police' 'public Policy Immunity']
['tort Law' 'negligence' 'civil Procedure' 'police Powers and Liability'] ['summary Dismissal' 'strike Out of Pleadings' 'duty of Care in Police Investigations' 'common Law Immunity of Police' 'public Policy Immunity']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Negligence Claim Against Police Arising From a Police Investigation for the Recovery of the First Plaintiff's Children / Defendants' Notice of Motion Seeking Dismissal Under Part 15 R 26 or Part 13 R 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, or Alternatively Strike Out of the Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants owed the plaintiffs a duty of care in negligence in relation to the use of information supplied during a police inquiry concerning missing children.' 'Whether the actions of the second defendant amounted to a police investigation.' 'Whether police are immune from negligence claims in respect of investigative functions on grounds of public policy.' 'Whether the proceedings should be dismissed or the amended statement of claim struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action.']

Ratio Decidendi

The second defendant's conduct was properly characterised as part of a police investigation, even though no crime had then been committed or reported, because it involved inquiry to ascertain facts and the exercise of police discretion. The authorities established that police owed no duty of care to the plaintiffs in respect of that investigation and had immunity on public policy grounds. The plaintiffs' negligence claim was therefore doomed to fail and the statement of claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' statement of claim dismissed; plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiffs' statement of claim is dismissed." "The plaintiffs' are to pay the defendants' costs."]