Ronald Collins v State of New South Wales

The plaintiff moves on a notice of motion filed on 24 March 2026 seeking leave, to commence and maintain his civil proceedings, pursuant to s 4 of the Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW) (“Felons Act”), with such orders made nunc pro tunc and taking effect from 11 March 2026.

In support of the application, the plaintiff reads the affidavit of his solicitor, Kelly Keane dated 19 March 2026. The proceedings were commenced in this Court by way of a Statement of Claim filed on 11 March 2026. The plaintiff claims personal injury damages from the defendant in negligence, breach of non-delegable duty of care, and in vicarious liability.

The plaintiff was assessed by Dr Reutens, a psychiatrist, on 3 February 2026. The plaintiff grew up in Jubullum, an Aboriginal mission. The plaintiff was raised with his five sisters and one brother. Notwithstanding a reported history of an affectionate and caring relationship with his mother, at the age of 14 or 15 he was first sent to juvenile detention at Acmena Youth Justice Centre. The recorded abuse in that institution is set out in the documentary material, and it is not necessary to recount the details of the allegations here.

Dr Reutens diagnosed the plaintiff with stimulant use disorder in remission in a controlled environment and maintenance therapy and post-traumatic stress disorder. Dr Reutens opines that the subject abuse at Acmena Youth Justice Centre is causally related to the post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder.

Pursuant to s 4 the Felons Act, the plaintiff requires leave to institute the proceedings. Section 5 provides that the court may only grant leave if “satisfied that the proceedings are not an abuse of process and that there is prima face ground for the proceedings”. It is uncontroversial that leave can be granted retrospectively.

The defendant neither consents to nor opposes leave being granted.

The relevant principles regarding the grant of leave pursuant to ss 4 and 5 of the Felons Act were considered by Wilson J in TS v The State of New South Wales [2021] NSWSC 1649 at [11]-[12]:

Having perused the material in support of this application, I am satisfied that the statutory requirements are met. The plaintiff’s claim has reasonable prospects of success based on provable facts and a reasonably arguable view of the law. I am not of the view that the claim is an abuse of process. I have come to that conclusion for the following combined reasons.

First, the solicitor on record has deposed to investigating the plaintiff's claim and forming the opinion that his claim has reasonable prospects of success based on provable facts and a reasonably arguably view of the law. Secondly, the plaintiff has given a history of the alleged abuse the subject of the proceedings to Dr Reutens. That history is generally consistent with the instructions provided by the plaintiff to his solicitor. Thirdly, there is a plausible chain of causation linking the psychiatric conditions that Dr Reutens has diagnosed the plaintiff with and the alleged abuse.

Accordingly, I retrospectively grant leave under s 4 of the Felons Act.

I make the following orders: