ABM v DDM [2026] NSWSC 779 (Link to Caselaw).
The plaintiff sued the defendant for sexual abuse or other sexual misconduct allegedly committed by the defendant between when the plaintiff was six years old and when the plaintiff was 14 years old. Some years ago, the defendant was tried and found not guilty of charges of sexual or indecent assault against the plaintiff. The defendant was recently charged in another State with four counts of indecently dealing with a girl under the age of 16 years and after those charges had been laid, the plaintiff commenced these proceedings against the defendant.
The defendant denies the criminal charges, and filed evidence to has exercised and will continue to exercise his right to silence. He asserted that there is a substantial factual overlap between the current criminal charges and these proceedings and therefore sought a stay of the civil proceedings save for some minor steps.
It was noted that the Court will not grant a stay of proceedings merely because related charges have been brought and criminal proceedings are pending: Zhao at [35]. It must be apparent that the accused is at risk of prejudice in the conduct of their defence in the criminal trial: Zhao at [35]. The risk of prejudice must be real and that risk is to be weighed against the prejudice that a stay of the civil proceedings would occasion: Zhao at [47] and [50]. A potential prejudice for an accused may be that the evidence given by that person in a civil proceeding would reveal or telegraph information to the prosecutor about the accused’s defence in the criminal proceeding.
Recognising that the Court is called upon to decide where the balance lies, in the circumstances of the case the court was satisfied that the balance favours granting the stay after the defence has been filed ([40]), until the determination of the criminal proceedings currently pending against the defendant.
[BillMaddensWordpress #2551]