(High Court of Australia) The court considered the ingredients of the tort of misfeasance in public office.
Held: A necessary ingredient was proof of loss.
Judges:
Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudronn, McHugh JJ
Citations:
(1995) 69 ALJR 527, (1995) 185 CLR 307, (1995) 129 ALR 1, (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-335
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.240001
