Multiple plaintiffs awarded a combined $2,169,232.39 after children were assaulted at childcare centre

Jun 9, 2023 | Publication

The two children attended Footprints Childcare Centre, owned by Little Pigeon Pty Ltd, between 2008 and 2010, where Mr Bird worked and was a 1% shareholder in the company. Both of the child’s Mothers removed them from the centre upon hearing that Mr Bird had been arrested and charged with offences relating to another child at the centre.

Mr Bird, the Father of the owner of Little Pigeon, spent a considerable amount of time at the childcare centre, in which he claims he treated the children as if they were his own grandchildren. At times, Mr Bird was unsupervised and committed inappropriate acts, including acts of a sexual nature, towards the children. It was found that the lack of supervision was inconsistent with the childcare protection policies in place at the centre, and that precautions should have been undertaken to prevent Mr Bird being alone with any child. 

Both the children were awarded damages for their loss and ongoing suffering, as well as the Mothers of both children for the mental harm they have suffered as a consequence of these events – amounting to a combined total of $2,169,232.39. In addition, both Ms Clancy, the owner of Little Pigeon Pty Ltd, and the company itself, was found negligent in its operation of the childcare centre.

Outline

  • B and D both attended Footprints childcare centre, owned by Little Birds Pty Ltd, where Mr Bird who worked, and was a 1% shareholder. They were then removed upon Mr Bird being arrested and charged in relation to offences relating to other children who attended the centre.
  • It was found, Mr Bird assaulted both B and D, children of A and C respectively. 
  • Mr Bird found to be an employee and not a not volunteer
  • Little Birds Pty Ltd and Ms clancy (Director and owner) vicarious liable for Mr Bird’s actions as an employee, and further negligent

Negligence (B and D – Children)

  • No issue as to duty of care on B and D
  • Found there was a breach of this duty of care
  • Child protection policy not followed, allowing Mr Bird to be unsupervised with children
  • No issue of causation

Negligence (A and C – Mothers)

  • Found duty was owed
  • And that duty was breached
  • No issues with causation

Damages

A:

  • Non-economic loss: $158,000
  • Past out of pocket expenses: $$8,835.39 
  • Future out of pocket expenses: $58,478.46 
  • Past economic loss: $187,482.50
  • Past superannuation: $17,810.84
  • Future economic loss and superannuation: $111,000.
  • Past domestic assistance: $195,042.40
  • Future Domestic Assistance: $265.60 for life
  • Total: $736,649.59 

B:

  • Non-economic loss: $270,000
  • Exemplary damages: $70,000
  • Future out of pocket: $25,000
  • Future economic loss/superannuation: $100,000
  • Total: $465,000

C: 

  • Non-economic loss: $96,000
  • Past out of pocket: $6014.10
  • Future out of pocket expenses: $52,828.61
  • Past economic loss: $225,333.50
  • Past superannuation: $21,406.6
  • Future economic losss/Superannuation: $111,000
  • Total: $512,582.81

D:

  • Non-economic loss: $260,000
  • Exemplary damages: $70,000
  • Future out of pocket expenses: $25,000
  • Future economic loss/Superannuation: $100,000
  • Total: $455,000.00

Total Awarded damages: $2,169,232.39

The information in this publication is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this publication is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. We are not responsible for the information of any source to which a link is provided or reference is made and exclude all liability in connection with use of these sources. If you do not wish to receive newsletters from us, please let us know.

Latest Insights

Partnership Disputes – Causes and Resolution

Partnerships are a common business structure.  Frequently we see disputes where one or more partners wishes to leave the partnership, and financial and other disputes relating to a partnership.  Understanding the causes of these disputes and how they can be...

What Types of Claims can be made on a Deceased Estate?

A deceased estate has a range of potential claims that can be made against it.  These arise not only from the actions of the deceased but also from legislation that deals with how deceased estates are administered and distributed. Some examples of potential...

Fundamentals of Companies – Getting the Basics Right

A company is a separate legal entity, being an artificial person that only ceases to exist via the hands of its members or via government intervention.  A company’s personality is expressed in its constitution and enables the members of the company to combine...

Loss of chance

In the landmark decision of Tabet v Gett [2010] 240 CLR 537, the High Court of Australia provided crucial insights into the principles of causation in negligence claims. This case is pivotal for understanding how courts assess the direct link between alleged...

Webinar – How to Reduce the Risk of a Claim on Your Estate

Join us for an informative seminar on "How to Reduce the Risk of a Claim on Your Estate" via Zoom on Thursday, 5 September at 8 pm. This one-hour complimentary session, including a Q&A segment, will provide valuable insights and practical strategies to safeguard...

New Industrial Manslaughter laws in NSW

The Industrial Manslaughter Bill has passed NSW Parliament and will make industrial manslaugther an offence. According to the NSW government, since 2019 more than 300 workers have been killed in NSW.  Under the new law, a business or individual can be held...

8 Types of People that can Claim on a Deceased Estate

In New South Wales, there are many different types of people that can potentially claim on a deceased estate if, for instance, inadequate or no provision has been made for them or they are owed money by the estate (or they were owed money by the deceased).  ...

What is the difference between Joint Tenancy and Tenants in Common?

A very important difference in ownership of property where there are two or more owners is Joint Tenancy v Tenants in Common. It is essential to understand the difference when and if you buy property with another person. If you own a property as Joint Tenants and one...