Goldie v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) [2004] FCA 156

Goldie v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) [2004] FCA 156

An award of $22,000 was appropriate because the wrongful arrest and three-day detention seriously interfered with Mr Goldie's liberty, dignity and feelings, including the public setting of the arrest, physical restraint, pat searches, medical examination and detention requirements; however, the officers acted with restraint and did no more than they believed necessary, so there were no aggravating circumstances or basis for exemplary damages, and no evidence supported loss of earnings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Claim for Damages for Wrongful Arrest, False Imprisonment and Unlawful Detention Under the Migration Act 1958 (cth) / Assessment of Damages and Reconsideration of Costs After Remitter From the Full Court
Outcome
Damages awarded to the applicant against the first, second and sixth respondents; no aggravated or exemplary damages awarded; costs apportioned.
Legal Topics
['false Imprisonment' 'wrongful Arrest' 'unlawful Immigration Detention' 'assessment of Damages' 'aggravated Damages' 'exemplary Damages' 'costs']
['migration' 'torts'] ['false Imprisonment' 'wrongful Arrest' 'unlawful Immigration Detention' 'assessment of Damages' 'aggravated Damages' 'exemplary Damages' 'costs']

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

Claim for Damages for Wrongful Arrest, False Imprisonment and Unlawful Detention Under the Migration Act 1958 (cth) / Assessment of Damages and Reconsideration of Costs After Remitter From the Full Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What amount of damages should be awarded for Mr Goldie's wrongful arrest and unlawful detention from 24 February 1998 until 27 February 1998." 'Whether aggravated damages or exemplary damages should be awarded.' 'Whether compensation should include any amount for loss of earnings.' 'How costs of the first instance proceeding and the assessment of damages should be apportioned.']

Ratio Decidendi

An award of $22,000 was appropriate because the wrongful arrest and three-day detention seriously interfered with Mr Goldie's liberty, dignity and feelings, including the public setting of the arrest, physical restraint, pat searches, medical examination and detention requirements; however, the officers acted with restraint and did no more than they believed necessary, so there were no aggravating circumstances or basis for exemplary damages, and no evidence supported loss of earnings.

Court Disposition

Damages awarded to the applicant against the first, second and sixth respondents; no aggravated or exemplary damages awarded; costs apportioned.

Orders

  • ['The first, second and sixth respondents pay the applicant damages for wrongful arrest and imprisonment in the sum of $22,000.' "The applicant pay one third of the respondents' costs of the proceedings, not including the assessment of damages, to be taxed as one set." "The first, second and sixth respondents pay...