Publications

Case Summary: Stanford Barton (a pseudonym) v The State of New South Wales [2025] VSC 57

Published on March 5, 2025 by Julia Harrison, Hannah Duque and Isabella Mirjanoska

Stanford Barton (a pseudonym) v The State of New South Wales [1] is a decision which was handed down in the Supreme Court of Victoria on 25 February 2025.

Background

Stanford Barton (the Plaintiff) commenced proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria against the State of New South Wales (the Defendant). The Plaintiff alleged that he was sexually abused by a music teacher, Mr Peter Boys, whilst he was a student at Adamstown Primary School and Broadmeadows High School, which were both located in New South Wales [2].

The Defendant sought a transfer of the proceeding to the Supreme Court of New South Wales [3] pursuant to section 5(2)(b)(iii) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Vic) [4] The Defendant submitted that the following ‘connecting factors’ [5] should be taken into account:

i. The entirety of the alleged abuse occurred in New South Wales [6].

ii. The Defendant to the proceeding was the State of New South Wales [7].

iii. The witnesses to be called regarding liability resided in New South Wales [8].

iv. The law of New South Wales would govern issues of liability and quantum [9].

v. The Plaintiff’s medical witnesses whom are based in Victoria may be able to give their evidence via audio visual link [10].

vi. A majority of documents relevant to the proceeding were located in New South Wales [11].

vii. A view may be necessary [12].

The Defendant further submitted that the Plaintiff’s only connection with the State of Victoria was that it was his place of residence; it was the location of his only other lay witness; it was the location of his treating doctors; and that it was the location of his solicitors [13].

Decision

Judd J determined that New South Wales was the most appropriate or natural forum for the proceeding [14]. Her Honour considered that the following factors were relevant:

i. The entirety of the alleged abuse occurred at a school which was located in New South Wales [15].

ii. The Defendant to the proceeding was the State of New South Wales through the Department of Education [16].

iii. The majority of witnesses to be called regarding liability were aged in their seventies and resided in New South Wales [17]. Judd J considered that whilst these witnesses are able to give their evidence via audio visual link, it was preferable that they do so in person [18].

iv. The law of New South Wales was governing the proceeding [19]. Judd J considered that whilst a Victorian Judge is able to apply the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), New South Wales has the specialisation and experience in any damages assessment pursuant to that Act [20].

Her Honour did not consider that a view would assist the Court [21] and otherwise indicated that any argument regarding the location of the documents was not of substance as the documents could be electronically transmitted to another jurisdiction [22].

Judd J ultimately ordered that the proceeding be transferred to the Supreme Court of NSW [23].

You can read the full decision here.

Please note that this article does not constitute legal advice. If you are seeking professional advice on any legal matters, you can contact Carroll & O’Dea Lawyers on 1800 059 278 or via our Contact Page and one of our lawyers will be able to assist you.

---

[1] Stanford Barton (a pseudonym) v The State of New South Wales [2025] VSC 57.

[2] Ibid, [1] (Judd J).

[3] Ibid, [2] (Judd J).

[4] Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Vic), s 5(2)(b)(iii).

[5] Stanford Barton (a pseudonym) v The State of New South Wales [2025] VSC 57, [10] (Judd J).

[6] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[7] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[8] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[9] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[10] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[11] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[12] Ibid, [12] (Judd J).

[13] Ibid, [13] (Judd J).

[14] Ibid, [22] (Judd J).

[15] Ibid, [22] (Judd J).

[16] Ibid, [22] (Judd J).

[17] Ibid, [22] (Judd J).

[18] Ibid, [24] (Judd J).

[19] Ibid, [22] (Judd J).

[20] Ibid, [23] (Judd J).

[21] Ibid, [25] (Judd J).

[22] Ibid, [26] (Judd J).

[23] Ibid, [29] (Judd J).