1. Police Negligence in Domestic Violence
Associate Professor Mandy Shircore

2. Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another
The consequences are stark and tragic. Ms Michael has lost her life in the most violent fashion… .An investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission led to a lengthy report. It contained serious criticisms of both police forces for individual and organisational failures.

3. The Problem of Domestic Violence
Tara Brown: Police officers disciplined over handling of domestic violence protection order

4. Suing the Police in Negligence
Could police in Australia be held liable in negligence for harm that has resulted from a failure by the police to respond adequately to a domestic violence situation?

5. Duty of Care – Salient Factors
Third party criminal harm
The degree of control
The vulnerability of the victim
Inconsistent Duties
Public policy considerations

6. The reasonably foreseeable plaintiff

7. Liability for Third Party Criminal Conduct
“the general rule is that the law does not impose on a person a duty to control another’s actions to prevent harm to third persons”
Modbury Triangle Shopping Centre v Anzil

8. Control over the source of harm
Where the defendant has control over the source of harm (the perpetrator of the violence) court may be more willing to find a duty of care existed.
Does the Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act provide the police with powers to control the perpetrator of domestic violence?

9. Vulnerability of the Plt
The plaintiff could not reasonably be expected to have protected themselves from the risk or source of harm
Reliance
The plaintiff could reasonably rely on the defendant to properly exercise reasonable care and skill
Assumption of Responsibility
Where the defendant assumes a responsibility to protect the plaintiff – duty of care more readily imposed

10. Domestic Violence Negligence cases
Batchelor v Tasmania (2005) 13 Tas R 403;
Spearpoint v New South Wales [2009] NSWCA 233 (30 July 2009);
Police assumed responsibility to protect Plaintiff
Plaintiff reasonably relied on defendant to protect
DUTY OF CARE ARGUABLE

11. Inconsistent Duties Public duty to protect public at large vs.
Private duty of care to an individual

12. Public Policy Considerations
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
No Duty owed by police for investigative work
Open Floodgates
Not effective mechanism for improving police investigations
Divert resources from police work
Encourage Defensive Policing

13. At least arguable in Australia
Conclusion
Could the police be held liable in negligence for failing to adequately respond to a call for help from a victim of domestic violence?
At least arguable in Australia