Vicarious liability placed on Victorian institutions for workers with arrangements ‘akin to employment’

New Victorian laws will expand the definition of vicarious liability for child abuse, which will effectively overturn the precedent set by Bird v DP.

Following its passage last week (17 February), the Justice Legislation Amendment (Vicarious Liability for Child Abuse) Bill 2025 expands the definition of vicarious liability for child abuse, superseding a 2024 precedent.

In late 2024, in the matter of Bird v DP, the High Court found that the Catholic Church cannot be held responsible for the abuse of a child by a priest due to vicarious liability being confined to employment relationships, with the priest having not been formally employed by the church.

New Victorian laws will expand the definition of vicarious liability for child abuse, which will effectively overturn the precedent set by the High Court in Bird v DP in late 2024.

Maurice Blackburn principal lawyer John Rule said the amendment closes a legal loophole that allowed institutions to avoid responsibility for abuse occurring under their watch, given the perpetrator was not a formal employee of the organisation.

“This is a long‑awaited breakthrough for survivors here in Victoria seeking justice and accountability,” Rule said.

Rule noted the new legislation will be able to hold institutions such as churches responsible for the actions of formal employees and those “akin to employment”.

“Importantly, the laws are retrospective to ensure that no survivor in Victoria will be left worse off because of the Bird v DP High Court decision,” Rule said.

“We commend the Victorian government for taking action to uphold the legal rights of survivors of child abuse.”

Rule urged other states and territories to follow Victoria’s lead to meet the scourge of child abuse through enshrining the legal principle of vicarious liability.

“These reforms are a commonsense and compassionate response to narrow legal interpretations that have limited the ability of survivors to seek redress for the harm they have experienced,” he said.

“We welcome this law reform and commend the Victorian government for acting decisively and collaboratively to rectify this injustice.”

The Australian Lawyers Alliance also welcomed the reform, saying that it reflects what can be achieved when “victim-survivor advocates, the legal profession, and government work together with a shared purpose, ensuring that the law serves the people it is meant to protect”.

Susan Accary, the Victorian state president of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, said the legislation is a product of collaboration and resolve.

“Victim-survivors, their advocates, members of the legal community, and the Victorian government came together with a common goal, to restore access to justice for victim-survivors,” said Accary.

“This legislation will have a real and immediate impact [for] the people who have been blocked from holding institutions to account following last year’s High Court decision in Bird v DP.

“It is a recognition that when institutions assume responsibility for children or vulnerable people, the law must be capable of responding when that trust is catastrophically breached.”

Accary concluded that from this amendment, the focus returns to the victim-survivor and places the responsibility on institutions that place individuals in positions of power over children.