Terry Tsakirios v State of New South Wales

2025/00150430

TORT – on 7 May 2018, an armed and masked offender robbed a Subway fast food outlet (the Subway Robbery) – on 27 November 2019, DSC Allan charged Mr Terry Tsakirios (the appellant) with the offence of armed robbery – DSC Allan then prosecuted the proceedings until the prosecution was taken over by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) – on 13 December 2019, the appellant appeared at Penrith Local Court and made no application for bail – bail was formally refused – on 2 July 2021, following representations made by the appellant’s solicitors, the DPP withdrew the charges – the appellant alleged that the State of New South Wales (the State) was vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of DSC Allan – the appellant pleaded a case comprising three causes of action: malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, and misfeasance in public office – the primary judge held that DSC Allan complied with her obligations by informing the appellant of her name, station, and the reasons for his arrest – the primary judge held that the judicial determination by the Magistrate not to grant bail broke any causal link between the actions of the police and the appellant’s continued custody – the primary judge held that the appellant had not established that the proceedings were commenced without reasonable and probable cause – the primary judge held that there was no basis for concluding that DSC Allan was recklessly indifferent to an invalid act or to a lack of power – whether the primary judge failed to give adequate reasons, or otherwise miscarried in the fact finding process, by failing to consider relevant and cogent evidence and substantial submissions of the appellant relating to that evidence – whether the reasons of the primary judge were inadequate in that the nature and degree of unattributed copying and pasting of the respondent's written submissions in the judgment was such as to suggest that the primary judge failed to give independent and impartial consideration to the evidence and the issues – whether the primary judge erred in failing to find that DSC Allan had breached her duty pursuant to s 15A of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 (NSW) (DPP Act) by failing to disclose to the DPP the information, and documents recording the information, concerning alternative suspects for the offence for which the appellant was charged – whether the primary judge erred in finding that DSC Allan did not intend the appellant harm or at least know or was reckless to harm being a likely consequence of her invalid or unauthorised acts and omissions – whether the primary judge erred in failing to give reasons for his finding that the duty to disclose under the DPP Act was not a public duty.

Tsakirios v State of New South Wales [2025] NSWDC 90