Fregnan v Stanizzo; Stanizzo v Badarne; Stanizzo v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 402

Fregnan v Stanizzo; Stanizzo v Badarne; Stanizzo v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWSC 402

Mr Stanizzo failed to prove malicious prosecution against the State because Detective Murdock had a genuine and objectively sufficient basis to consider there was a proper case for prosecution and malice was not established. Mr Stanizzo failed to prove malicious prosecution against Mr Badarne because Mr Badarne was not shown to be a prosecutor, the falsity of his reports was not established, and malice was not proved. Mr Stanizzo failed on his cross-claim against Ms Valvano because the Court was comfortably satisfied that her allegations of assault were true and that she was entitled to complain to police. Ms Valvano succeeded on her assault claim because her accounts of the 19 September...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Tort Proceedings for Damages for Sexual Assault and Malicious Prosecution / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for Ms Valvano against Mr Stanizzo in proceedings 2012/129649 for $135,000; judgment for Ms Valvano on Mr Stanizzo's cross-claim; judgment for Mr Badarne in proceedings 2014/92425; judgment for the State of New South Wales in proceedings 2016/296293.
Legal Topics
['malicious Prosecution' 'reasonable and Probable Cause' 'malice' 'complainant Liability as Prosecutor' 'sexual Assault Damages' 'assessment of Damages at Common Law' 'causation of Psychiatric Injury']
['torts' 'civil Procedure' 'evidence' 'damages'] ['malicious Prosecution' 'reasonable and Probable Cause' 'malice' 'complainant Liability as Prosecutor' 'sexual Assault Damages' 'assessment of Damages at Common Law' 'causation of Psychiatric Injury']

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

Civil Tort Proceedings for Damages for Sexual Assault and Malicious Prosecution / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the State of New South Wales instituted or maintained the criminal prosecution of Mr Stanizzo without reasonable and probable cause.' 'Whether Detective Murdock or the State acted with malice in commencing or maintaining the prosecution.' 'Whether Mr Badarne was liable as a prosecutor for malicious prosecution by providing false or malicious complaints to police.' 'Whether Ms Valvano was liable as a prosecutor for malicious prosecution by making and maintaining sexual assault allegations against Mr Stanizzo.' 'Whether Mr Stanizzo sexually assaulted Ms Valvano on 19 September 2008 and 25 May 2009.' 'What damages should be awarded to Ms Valvano for the assaults.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Stanizzo failed to prove malicious prosecution against the State because Detective Murdock had a genuine and objectively sufficient basis to consider there was a proper case for prosecution and malice was not established. Mr Stanizzo failed to prove malicious prosecution against Mr Badarne because Mr Badarne was not shown to be a prosecutor, the falsity of his reports was not established, and malice was not proved. Mr Stanizzo failed on his cross-claim against Ms Valvano because the Court was comfortably satisfied that her allegations of assault were true and that she was entitled to complain to police. Ms Valvano succeeded on her assault claim because her accounts of the 19 September...

Court Disposition

Judgment for Ms Valvano against Mr Stanizzo in proceedings 2012/129649 for $135,000; judgment for Ms Valvano on Mr Stanizzo's cross-claim; judgment for Mr Badarne in proceedings 2014/92425; judgment for the State of New South Wales in proceedings 2016/296293.

Orders

  • ["In proceedings 2012/129649: Judgment for the plaintiff for $135,000 on the plaintiff's claim." 'In proceedings 2012/129649: Judgment for the cross-defendant on the cross-claim.' "In proceedings 2012/129649: Order the defendant/cross-claimant to pay the plaintiff/cross-defendant's costs of the proceedings." 'In...