The purpose of this report is to sum up the court case of Rixon Vs Star City PTY LTD (2001 september). Mr Brian Rixon is the Appellant and Star City Pty Ltd (formerly Sydney Harbour Casino Pty Ltd) is the Respondent. Mr Rixon is suing Star City for battery, assult and unlawful arrest. What crime has beem commited? Include a defention of this crime. In this particulular case of Brian Rixon vs Star City PTY LTD, battery, assult and unlawful arrest were alegedely commited, these offences fall under tort law. A tort can be defined as a civil wrong. Battery can be defined as; direct intentional or neglective conduct that causes contact with the body of another without consent. While in criminal law this conduct is also known as assault, in civil actions a distinction is made between battery that invoves a threat of contact without assault. Brian Rixon had been made the subject of an exclusion order issued under the Casino Control Act (which meant that he could not return to the casino). However Mr Rixon did not abide to these terms and once again entered the casino. As a result of this an employee of the respondent approached Mr Rixon in the casino, placed his hand on Mr Rixon, spun him around informed him that; as an excluded person, he was required to follow him to an interview room. Mr Rixon was held in this room for approximately an hour and a half before police arrived; during which time he claimed he suffered stress and anxiety. Indentify the defenda nts and what plea they used.
The defendants in this particular case are Star City PTY LTD. They had decided to plea not guilty and defended there employes decision to remove Mr Rixon from the casino as he was violating the casino control act.
Outline the arguments they used in there case
The defendants used the following arguments in there defence: Defence against assualt- Proof of assault requires proof of an intention to create in another...
Book-Personal Law Briefs/ Author, Mandy shircore/ Publisher, Frenchs forest
Please join StudyMode to read the full document