False Imprisonment, Fare Dodging and Federation: Mr Robertson’s Evening Out

Title
False Imprisonment, Fare Dodging and Federation: Mr Robertson’s Evening Out
Publication Date
2009
Author(s)
Lunney, Mark
( author )
OrcID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1462-5960
Email: mlunney@une.edu.au
UNE Id une-id:mlunney
Type of document
Journal Article
Language
en
Entity Type
Publication
Publisher
Thomson Reuters
Place of publication
Australia
UNE publication id
une:5046
Abstract
The decisions of the High Court and the Privy Council in Robertson v The Balmain New Ferry Company Ltd retain their place in modern tort texts discussing false imprisonment. This is surprising because the reasoning is frequently considered unclear at best or incorrect as worst. This article considers the case in two historical contexts to evaluate these views. The first context considers contemporary legal doctrine by exploring the significance of the pre-Judicature Act pleading rules applicable in New South Wales and the gap in the contemporary law that made the company’s method of enforcing fare collection problematic. Despite these impediments, the commercial pressures to uphold the system of fare collection proved sufficient to overcome these objections. The second, broader, historical context explores the reaction to the decision of the High Court as an aspect of lingering anti-federal sentiment in New South Wales. The analysis reveals a uniquely Australian context to the decision and reveals the potential of studies of the history of private law to contribute to the history of Australian law more generally.
Link
Citation
Sydney Law Review, 31(4), p. 537-558
ISSN
0082-0512
Start page
537
End page
558

Files:

NameSizeformatDescriptionLink