Submission No 17 s exualisation of children and young people organisation

 
a.
Where the injury was caused by the criminal conduct of another-nature of the 
harm;
 
b.
Where the defendant is exercising a statutory power or discretion –statutory 
power;
 
c.
Where there is a difficulty of confining the class of persons who may be owed the 
duth-indeterminancy of class; and
 
d.
Where there is a need to preserve harmony with other legal principles or a 
statutory scheme-coherence.
14
 
15.
It is only the second and possibly the fourth which is relevant here. Each state and territory 
education system operates under distinct statutory regimes. It is beyond the scope of this 
opinion to examine each piece of legislation. However, I have considered the 
Education Act 
1972
(SA), the 
Education Act 1990
(NSW) and the 
Education and Training Reform Act 2006
(Vic). There is nothing in those Acts which prohibits the imposition of a duty of care in 
relation to information delivered as part of the curriculum which is known (or which 
should be known) to be dangerous to a pupil’s health if not carefully presented. 
 
16.
It may however be argued that as the SSCA program is aimed to helping a particular subset 
of pupils, it would be inconsistent with the need to help those students to impose a duty of 
care. The answer to that proposition is that when dealing with tender and immature minds, 
great care is needed, so that the help that is intended does not turn out to be harmful. This 
will be a matter which will have to be considered and decided in any particular case which 
presents itself. Assuming that injury occurs away from the school it will be argued that 
there can be no duty of care imposed on the school authority. However, as I have indicated 
12
Ibid [30]-[33]. 
13
(2001) 207 CLR 562 at [50]. 
14
Ibid at [17]-[19]. 

---

6 
at [11] above, the duty of care is not dependent on the harm occurring in school hours or 
on school premises.