From: | Bill Madden <bill_madden@optusnet.com.au> |
To: | obligations@uwo.ca |
Date: | 23/09/2009 08:01:53 UTC |
Subject: | Loss of chance in medical negligence (Australia) |
The availability of damages for ‘loss of a chance’ in the context of
medical negligence will be considered by the High Court of Australia on
12 & 13 November 2009.
Special leave was granted by the court on 4 September 2009[1] <#_ftn1>,
to appeal the New South Wales Court of Appeal decision /Gett v Tabet/
[2009] NSWCA 76, in which the court took a similar view to the House of
Lords in Gregg v Scott but a different view to that reached by the NSW
Court of Appeal in /Rufo v Hosking/ [2004] NSWCA 391.
The High Court bulletin[2] <#_ftn2> summarises the background facts as
relating to a six year old girl initially admitted to hospital
complaining of headaches and vomiting who was re-admitted two weeks
later and diagnosed with meningitis. Immediate surgery and subsequent
chemotherapy was successful (in the sense that she survived) but left
girl severely disabled. The court will consider whether the causal
effects of clinical negligence should be assessed only on balance of
probabilities alone and not on the basis of loss of chance of a better
outcome. As to the calculation of the potential damage, the court will
consider whether in assessing such a loss of chance one must exclude
those matters which gave the chance or an increased chance of a better
outcome but were not proven on the balance of probabilities as the
likely treatment.
Interestingly the High Court earlier in November 2009, will deal with
/Amaca Pty Ltd v Ellis & Ors; State of South Australia v Ellis & Ors;
Millennium Inorganic Chemicals Ltd v Ellis & Ors*[3]* <#_ftn3>/. Whilst
not addressing the same issues as /Tabet v Gett/, there is some
potential overlap with the Court being called upon to decide whether an
increase in risk of injury can be sufficient to prove causation and
whether test for causation can be modified depending on the nature of
the injury. Similar issues were addressed in England by the House of
Lords in /Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd/ [2003] 1 AC 32 and
in /Barker v Corus UK Ltd/ [2006] 2 AC 572.
Regards
Bill Madden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] <#_ftnref1> [2009] HCATrans 209.
[2] <#_ftnref2> High Court of Australia Bulletin [2009] HCAB 7 (14
September 2009)
[3] <#_ftnref3> [2009] HCATrans 77