Mr B v APC

2025/0008395

TORTS (other) – in October 2022, APC (the respondent) pursued damages against Mr B (the appellant) for child sexual abuse, which the respondent claims occurred while the appellant was in a de facto relationship with her mother, whom he later married and subsequently divorced – in August 2023, Wright J made freezing orders against the appellant, later continued by Lonergan J and Campbell J, based on evidence establishing a real risk that the appellant would take steps to divest assets, leaving a prospective judgment debt wholly or partially unsatisfied – the appellant argued that the respondent’s claims were fabricated as part of a scheme devised by her mother (originating during earlier family law proceedings) wrongly to deprive him of his assets – in December 2024, Schmidt AJ (the primary judge) gave judgment for the respondent, finding that the appellant had repeatedly sexually abused her as a child – in March 2025, the respondent was ordered to recalculate her damages in accordance with the primary judge’s findings – the appellant did not respond to the recalculated damages or the proposed orders – the primary judge ordered the appellant to pay the respondent $4,910,191.67 in damages – whether the Court erred by not making a legal expenses exception to the freezing order made on 4 August 2023 (and continued until 23 July 2025) – whether the primary judge erred by relying on alleged admissions by the appellant and rejecting his denial of historical sexual abuse, despite his challenge to the credibility and probative value of the solicitor’s evidence – whether the primary judge misapplied ss 140 and 142 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and Briginshaw v Briginshaw by requiring the appellant to prove his defence and preferring the respondent’s evidence – whether the primary judge erred in determining that the abuse occurred, without making specific findings as to what acts occurred, when and where – whether the primary judge failed to consider the lack of cross-examination of the appellant regarding the respondent’s allegations, in circumstances where the respondent relied on Browne v Dunn through pleadings and written evidence – whether the primary judge erred by accepting the evidence of the respondent’s mother, despite contrary findings in the family court judgment – whether the primary judge erred by admitting and relying on the family court judgment – whether the primary judge erred in drawing Jones v Dunkel inferences against the appellant in a historical abuse case where only two witnesses existed and the two not called were the appellant’s children – whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness during the trial – whether the primary judge erred in her Honour’s assessment of damages.

APC v Mr B [2023] NSWSC 988

APC v Mr B (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1608

APC v Mr B (No 3) [2025] NSWSC 142

APC v Mr B (No 4) [2025] NSWSC 273