Catchwords:
TORTS – intentional torts – where 18-year-old plaintiff became intoxicated after her Year 12 school formal and found herself isolated and alone in the street late at night – where she was picked up by a stranger and taken to a house where she was detained, drugged and repeatedly and violently sexually assaulted by three men – where plaintiff did not consent and was incapable of consenting due to heavy intoxication – where objective evidence corroborates plaintiff’s account including expert pharmacological evidence, medical examination evidence and a video recording taken during part of the sexual assaults – plaintiff established that the first and second defendants were two of the three men who detained, drugged and sexually assaulted her in the manner alleged – physical, psychological and psychiatric injuries and economic loss TORTS – intentional torts – where the first defendant, whilst held on remand following his arrest for the sexual assaults, conspired with his brother, the third defendant, to locate the plaintiff and coerce her to change her evidence to falsely assert she had consented to the sexual activity – where conspiracy with others, including a person who unbeknownst to them was an undercover police officer – where the first and third defendants were convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice – where objective evidence corroborates the plaintiff’s account including intercepted telephone calls between the conspirators and agreed facts on which the third defendant was sentenced – irrelevant that the conspiracy involved an undercover police officer – conspiracy to injure by unlawful means – where plaintiff changed her identity, moved her residence and severed contact with family and friends due to threats – where plaintiff continues to live under an assumed identity – plaintiff established the first and third defendants conspired to injure her by causing her psychological harm and that she suffered psychological injuries and economic loss TORTS – joint and successive tortfeasors – plaintiff’s submission that “you can’t unscramble the egg” categorising all three defendants as joint tortfeasors whose joint acts contributed to the same damage not accepted – first and second defendants liable as joint tortfeasors for the sexual assaults – first and third defendants liable as joint tortfeasors for the conspiracy TORTS – common law damages – apportionment between multiple joint tortfeasors across multiple torts – Court to do the best it can to determine the extent of the damage referable to different torts – third defendant not liable for damages solely attributable to the sexual assaults – aggravated damages – economic loss attributed equally