Medical Negligence Cases: Australia

Legal Helpline: ☎ 1800 529 835

If you have suffered an injury due to negligence, call our legal team to find out about your rights to compensation under the law.

Below you will find outlines of various cases covering aspects of medical negligence law.

DUTY OF CARE

Rogers v Whittaker (1992) 175 CLR 479

The duty of care covers examination, diagnosis, treatment and the provision of medical information and advice.

Thomsen v Davison [1975] Qd R 93

Duty of care in examinations for third parties. This case involved a regimental medical officer who failed to ascertain the plaintiff's pathology results and advise the plaintiff as to what they revealed.

Albrighton v Royal Prince Alfred Hospital [1980] 2 NSWLR 542

A neurosurgeon who had been called upon by an orthopaedic surgeon for a second opinion, owed the patient a duty of care even though the neurosurgeon was not directly responsible for treating the patient.

Lowns v Woods (1996) Aust Torts Reports 81-376

In certain circumstances, a doctor may owe a duty of care to attend an emergency and treat a person, even though there is no pre-existing relationship with the injured person. In this case, a doctor was asked to attend to a person who was suffering from an epileptic fit within 300 metres of the doctor's house. The doctor refused to assist. The person suffered brain damage and became quadriplegic. It was held that a duty of care existed.

BT v Oei [1999] NSWSC 1082

Doctor owed a duty to advise the patient that her sexual partner was HIV positive after joint medical consultation the purpose of which was to have blood tests for HIV and other STDs.

Wrongful Life:

Harriton v Stephens (2006) 226 CLR 52

The High Court determined that an action for wrongful life cannot be maintained in Australia.

BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE

The ultimate determination of the standard of care is left to the court to decide.

See: Rogers v Whittaker; Naxakis v Western General Hospital (1999) 197 CLR 269; Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434.

Dobler v Kenneth Halverson; Dobler v Kurt Halverson (by his tutor) [2007] NSWCA 335

The common law has been modified by statute law. Operation of s 5O defence, Civil Liability Act.

Boxell & Ors v Peninsula Health [2019] VSC 830 (17 December 2019)

On competent professional practice and peer professional opinion- s 59 of the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic).

Queensland v Masson [2020] HCA 28

Standard of care re: paramedics. Standard of care of an intensive care paramedic is (rightly) lower than the standard expected of a medical practitioner experienced in emergency medicine. In relation to the standard of care of professionals, the High Court's judgment reaffirms that the standard to which a professional is to be assessed is that which is widely accepted (which does not necessarily mean the majority of opinion). The clinical practice manual in question was considered to be guidance /a flexible document which permitted the exercise of clinical judgment.

INFORMATION ON MATERIAL RISKS

Rogers v Whittaker (1992) 175 CLR 479; F v R (1983) 33 SASR 189; Rosenberg v Percival (2001) 205 CLR 434.

Duty of care to warn of material risks, and obligation to provide information on risks to which the particular patient, if warned of the risk, would likely to attach significance to this. There is a subjective test as well as an objective test.

SURGEON'S EXPERIENCE AND PERSONAL PERFORMANCE STATISTICS

Chappel v Hart (1998) 195 CLR 232

G, PA and C v Down [2009] SASC 217

The specialist failed to to make it clear that the risk which he quoted as being 1 in 2000 was his own personal failure rate, where as the literature reported a rate of 1 in 500.

Jambrovic v Day [2017] NSWSC 1468

Brain tumour case- doctor's duty to warn and give advice re: surgery versus conservative treatment. Also, neurosurgeon failed to disclose that he had not performed endoscopic skull based surgery before.

BREACH OF STANDARD OF CARE

Wyong Shire Council v Shirt (1980) 146 CLR 40

Matters relevant to determining whether there has been a breach in the standard of care include: whether a reasonable person would have foreseen the risk of injury; whether they reasonably responded to this risk; the magnitude of the risk; the probability of the risk occuring; the expense and difficulty of taking alleviating action.

Brown v Simpson [2008] NSWDC 57

In this particular case, the court did not accept an argument of inherent risk "immunity". The trial judge did not accept that the risk of ureteric injury was inherent to colorectal surgery.

(Note that Civil Liability legislation has in some States a provision related to inherent risk immunity, but these provisions cannot be argued in information cases).

Breach of Duty of Care (Treatment; Misdiagnosis; Surgical Error; Referral; Follow-up)

Boehm v Deleuil [2005] WADC 55; McGroder v Maguire [2002] NSWCA 261.

Failure to refer patient to specialists.

McKay v McPherson [2010] VCC 585

Misdiagnosis involving a failure to recognise symptoms of heart failure.

Den Elzen v Harris [2008] WADC 106

Negligent failure to refer for CT scan which would have showed hydrocephalus.

Curtis v Queen Elizabeth Hospital [2008] SADC 48

Failure to diagnose and treat meningitis.

Dixon v Foote [2012] ACTSC 101

Negligent performance of hysterectomy resulting in damage to patient's ureter.

Kite v Malycha (1998) 71 SASR 321

Failure to follow-up on cytology report following biopsy and act on it, which resulted in failure to diagnose breast cancer.

Khan v Rathjen [2016] NSWDC 139

GP failed to properly assess and diagnose the plaintiff's hand injury and failed to refer him to an emergency department or hand surgeon.

Breach of Duty of Care (Information cases)

Olbourne v Wolf [2004] NSWCA 141

Cosmetic surgeon failed to warn of infection and scarring risks from breast reduction surgery.

Shead v Hooley [2000] NSWCA 362

Surgeon failed to warn of risk of gastroparesis with antrectomy and vagotomy procedure.

VICARIOUS LIABILITY AND NON-DELEGABLE DUTIES

Albrighton v Royal Prince Alfred Hospital [1980] 2 NSWLR 542

The relationship between the patient and the hospital was central in this case, and the patient was in fact a patient of the hospital which had undertaken to render to her complete medical services through various individuals, both employed and contracted, chosen by the hospital. The hospital owed the patient a duty which it could not evade by delegation to a person (in this case the neurosurgeon) who was not an employee.

Ellis v Wallsend Hospital (1989) 17 NSWLR 553

Sherry v Australasian Conference Association (t/as Sydney Adventist Hospital) [2006] NSWSC75

NB v Sydney South West Area Health Service [2010] NSWDC172

Plaintiff claimed that she was assaulted by a ward orderly in Liverpool Hospital. The trial judge found that if the assault had occured, it was criminal conduct outside the scope of the terms of the ward orderly's employment so that the hospital was not vicariously liable to the plaintiff.

CAUSATION

Tabet v Gett (2010) 265 ALR 227

The plaintiff bears the onus of proving causation on the balance of probabilities. Causation does not require certainty or precision.

The High Court in this case also disallowed recovery of damages for loss of a chance.

Elbourne v Gibbs [2006] NSWCA 127

The court considered factors relating to causation in information cases. These include remoteness of risk; the patient's desire for treatment; previous and later procedures undertaken; degree of faith in the doctor; the patient's knowledge; the need for treatment and alternatives available.

Wrongful Birth-

Nouri v Australian Capital Territory [2020] ACTCA 1 (13 February 2020) 

A wrongful birth case where it was found that Canberra Hospital had breached its duty of care to the child’s parents, however causation was not established. 

INTERIM PAYMENT OF DAMAGES

Tripovich v South Eastern Sydney Local Health District [2019] NSWSC 1793

Hypoxic brain injury at birth. Without admission of liability, pursuant to section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) the defendant, makes an interim payment to the plaintiff of $75,000.

Click here for disciplinary cases.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy