KEY POINTS:
The Supreme Court today said it would hear arguments on whether the sole survivor of the 2001 Auckland RSA triple murder can claim exemplary damages from the Department of Corrections.
In June the court granted Susan Couch leave to sue Corrections for damages on the grounds that she may be owed a duty of care. Its decision overturned a 2006 ruling by the Court of Appeal.
Ms Couch suffered serious injuries during the brutal attack by William Bell who had 102 previous convictions and was on parole at the time. She was seeking $500,000 for alleged negligence by Bell's probation officer.
In March next year the Supreme Court will consider two matters:
* Whether an exemplary damage application - for payment solely as punishment - should be allowed in the case of negligence;
* Whether ACC's Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 barred claims for damages based on personal injury.
The court's June decision accepted Ms Couch could possibly establish Corrections "had sufficient power and ability to control Bell in a way which would have prevented the harm which (she) suffered".
However, Ms Couch would have to prove "special risk" beyond that created by her working in close proximity with Bell at the RSA.
"There is nothing in Bell's history which suggested that either those with whom he was in contact frequently or those with whom he associated in an employment environment, were the subject of any enhanced risk," the court said.
Bell is serving a life sentence with a non-parole period of 30 years at Auckland Prison's Paremoremo maximum-security facility.
In December last year Bell received head injuries and was stabbed in the eye during an attack by another inmate.
- NZPA
