Plead carefully! Case note on St Paul's College Ltd v Allan

Mr Allan was a former boarder at St Paul’s School (the College). Mr Allan brought a claim against the school with respect to alleged sexual abuse by the boarding master in or about 2001. (St Paul’s College Ltd v Allan [2026] NSWCA 22 - NSW Caselaw).

In his pleadings, Mr Allan alleged (inter alia) that the College owed him a non-delegable duty of care to take precautions to prevent sexual abuse, that the abuse occurred while he was in the care of the College and under its supervision, and that the nature of the boarding master’s role at the College provided the opportunity for the abuse.

The College sought to strike out the pleading on the basis that it did not sufficiently plead the relevant facts underlying the allegation, nor did it specify what precautions the College ought to have adopted to prevent the abuse. There was an additional challenge to the pleadings as to vicarious liability, in particular a failure to detail how the College had provided the occasion for the abuse to occur.

Prior to the decision in AA, a negligence pleading in an historical abuse matter was expected to detail the factual basis pursuant to which the relevant duty existed, the nature of the alleged breach and importantly, what steps could have been taken to prevent the abuse.

Following the decision in AA however, where it is alleged that a non-delegable duty exists, a plaintiff now only needs to plead:

1. that they were a student at a school controlled/run by the defendant, such that the defendant owed them the established category of non-delegable duty;
2. that the school breached the duty – alleging that the plaintiff was sexually or physically abused by a person to whom the defendant had delegated its duty to;
3. the abuse occurred at a time and a place within the scope of the defendant’s duty; and
4. the abuse caused the plaintiff harm and they seek damages accordingly.

The High Court’s ruling in AA may see similar shifts towards a position that is more akin to strict liability, particularly in matters concerning workplace injuries and non-delegable duties owed by an employer. Appropriate consideration will need to be give as to whether a pleading challenge that would have succeeded in the past, will nevertheless now suffice.