The High Court of Australia unanimously allowed an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria, which dismissed an appeal by the Roman Catholic Diocese (Diocese), which held the Diocese was vicariously liable for sexual assaults committed by one of its priests. The abuse occurred in 1971 during pastoral visits to DP’s parents’ home. The priest was not an employee or agent of the Diocese. His actions were not done with the express or implied authorisation of the Diocese. Pursuant to Canon Law, their relationship permitted the Diocese to exercise control over the priest. The issue on appeal to the High Court was whether the relationship between the priest and Diocese, in the absence of an employment relationship, could give rise to a finding of vicarious liability. A majority of the High Court held the principles of vicarious liability are confined to employment relationships. They refused to extend the doctrine to include relationships that are “akin to employment”. The High Court also declined to consider DP’s contention that the Diocese owed him a non-delegable duty of care. For a link to the high court's full summary, click here For further breakdown, check out some of the related articles below. For further information Please get in contact with Christina Kolovos, Matthew Stockdale & Darren Seidl If you would like to stay up to date with Alerts, news and Insights from our team, you can subscribe to our mailing list here.