ABSTRACT
In AA v Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle [2026] HCA 2, the High Court of Australia overturned a longstanding principle that prevented the application of non-delegable duties to acts of intentional wrongdoing. This shift in the common law meant that a Catholic Diocese could be found liable for acts of sexual abuse perpetrated by a priest working under the auspices of the Diocese, aligning Australian law with recent approaches to non-delegable duties for intentional wrongdoing in England and Wales and Singapore. This Note examines how the majority’s reasoning is justifiable as to the coherence of non-delegable duties, especially in treating the duty as a separate avenue for recourse, the scope of which should not necessarily be determined by concerns about the vicarious liability avenue. It also argues that care should be taken as to the further development of the doctrine from an impact perspective. A balance should be struck between allowing recourse against organisations and ensuring that the responsibility of organisations for the intentional wrongdoing of third parties (employees or independent contractors) is not unduly burdensome insofar as it relates to hiring, vetting, and other industry practices and particularities.
Yuvaraj, Joshua, Opening the Floodgates? AA v Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Maitland-Newcastle [2026] HCA 2 (August 12, 2026), Singapore Journal of Legal Studies (forthcoming March 2027); University of Auckland Faculty of Law Research Paper Series 2026.
Leave a Reply