A former educator has narrowly escaped a court ruling that could have seen her paying over $2 million to former students, stemming from allegations of sexual abuse dating back five decades. The decision came after a judge concluded that she was unaware her actions were considered harmful at that time.

Helga Lam, who taught languages at a school in Sydney’s eastern suburbs in the late 1970s, faced allegations of sexually abusing several students during 1978 and 1979. Despite the serious nature of these accusations, a NSW Supreme Court judge determined that while the abuse did occur, Lam, now 71, was not negligent because she did not know her behavior was harmful according to the standards of that era.

Justice Ian Harrison, in his ruling on Friday, remarked on the different societal norms that existed nearly 50 years ago. “In my experience, things were different nearly 50 years ago,” he noted, reflecting on the outdated and ill-informed standards of the time. He emphasized that these standards were the basis upon which Ms. Lam’s duty to foresee any risk of mental harm to her students must be evaluated.

While this ruling does not erase the trauma experienced by the victims, it highlights the complexities involved in addressing historical cases of abuse through a modern lens.

“That does not reflect well upon the ill-informed standards of the day in this country. But those are the standards by which Ms Lam’s obligation to foresee that her conduct carried a risk of mental harm to the plaintiffs must be judged.”

Lam, who has always denied that any sexual abuse occurred, was arrested in 2021.

However, the charges against her were dismissed in July 2024 after the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal found she could not be prosecuted because of her gender.

That court found the relevant 1970s law, which was repealed in 1984, applied only to men abusing boys.

Four students launched civil proceedings against the NSW government in the NSW Supreme Court seeking compensation.

Eventually, they reached a $2.5 million settlement.

The state, which acknowledged it breached its duty to the men, then pursued Lam, seeking court orders that she be liable to pay a significant chunk of that money.

On Friday, Justice Harrison found that in the 1970s, the school where Lam worked ought to have been aware of the psychological consequences that students experienced after sexual abuse by an adult.

However, while the judge found the school was negligent, he did not make the same findings for Lam.

“There is simply no evidence before me of any kind to support the proposition that Ms Lam should … have been or become aware of the effects of sexual conduct between adults and minors,” he wrote.

The judge found that two of the settlements reached by the state government with the students were reasonable.

However, the remaining two were not as they were almost $600,000 higher than the amounts estimated through previous legal analysis.

If Lam was negligent however, Justice Harrison said he would have ordered she pay 35 per cent of the $2.5 million settlement amount.

He found that while she would have been refrained from assaulting her students through her contract with the school, her authority and control were limited.

The school had a higher responsibility and had failed to launch an investigation into the abuse, despite two complaints to the principal, the judge said.

1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732)

National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028