A new cause of action
15The amendments which seek to plead a claim for damages arising from pre-operative procedures and in so doing, to categorise the conduct of the defendants as a "sexual assault" or "other sexual misconduct" ought to be considered separately because the limitation period for these causes of action has expired.
16The provisions of s 65 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 require the plaintiff to satisfy the Court that the new causes of action and the claims for relief are such as to arise from "the same (or substantially the same) facts as those giving rise to an existing cause of action.": see s 65(2)(c) of the Civil Procedure Act.
17In my opinion, the new causes of action and claims for relief do arise out of the same or substantially the same facts as the existing proceedings. Whilst the facts, as is obvious from the additional facts which are pleaded, are not identical, they are nevertheless substantially similar. The substantial similarity arises at least in these ways:
(1)The parties to the causes of action and the relief claimed are identical.
(2)The causes of action arise from a single interaction, albeit over a number of hours, between the plaintiff and the defendants on 29 April 2007.
(3)The additional facts which are sought to be pleaded would have been relevant evidence to be given at a hearing on the causes of action in the original statement of claim and were included in the plaintiff's evidentiary statement.
(4)The factual and forensic basis for the acts amounting to the new causes of action remain the same as the earlier causes of action; that is, that there was no proper or valid consent to surgery or any of the treatment, including the pre-operative procedures. The evidence of the first defendant would have covered the conduct of the pre-operative procedures as part of his factual defence to the original allegations, including the allegations of the absence of a lawful consent. It will be said by the first defendant that the conduct of the plaintiff during the pre-operative procedures was evidence of, or else corroborative of, the giving of lawful consent.
(5)Having regard to the existence of the cause of action for assault and battery, these additional allegations constitute merely a different legal characterisation of the nature of the cause of action, which seems to be, essentially, for the purpose of seeking to avoid the damages provisions of the Civil Liability Act in the same manner as the allegations of the intentional tort of assault and battery.
18As well, I am not satisfied that the amendments will cause any actual prejudice to the first defendant or to the fifth defendant. None was the subject of evidence and none was asserted from the Bar table.
19I am well satisfied that these amendments can be made and that there will be no risk to the hearing date of the matter.
20None of the other grounds addressed by the defendants, either alone or in combination, are sufficient to cause me to decline the exercise of discretion to permit the amendment.
21The cause of action under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act is in an entirely different category. I would not permit this amendment for these reasons:
(a)It is an entirely new cause of action which would require quite different evidence both of a lay and expert kind to that likely to be called to deal with the balance of the proceedings.
(b)It is not possible to understand from the pleading, the evidence adduced on the motion, or from submissions by counsel for the plaintiff from the Bar table, what is actually alleged to have been the damage caused by the administration of either of the two drugs nominated.
(c)The pleading is defective in form.
(d)It comes too late in the proceedings for it to be allowed because, in my assessment, it places at real jeopardy the hearing of this matter in December and, accordingly, would unfairly affect the defendants and, more particularly, the Court's processes. It would adversely impact on other litigants.
22I make these orders:
(1)I grant the plaintiff leave to file an amended statement of claim on or before 4 pm on 7 September 2012 which reflects these reasons.
(2)I order that the amendments which are made by the additional causes of action for "sexual assault" or "other sexual misconduct" as set out in the amended statement of claim are to be taken to have commenced from the date of filing of the amended statement of claim and not the date of the original filing of the statement of claim.
(3)I order that the costs of the motion and the costs of and occasioned by the amendment are to be paid by the plaintiff.
23I make the following orders, which I note are not by consent and are made over the objection of the first defendant:
(4)I order the defendants to file and serve all lay and expert witness evidence upon which they propose to rely on or before 4 pm on 28 September 2012;
(5)I order that the time for the joint conferences of experts be extended to 26 October 2012;
(6)I order that any reports setting out the agreement or disagreement of the experts arising from their joint conference be filed and served by 7 November 2012;
(7)I order that the defendants file and serve any amended defence upon which they propose to rely by 4 pm on Friday 21 September 2012;
(8)I order that the plaintiff, if so advised, should file any reply on or before 4 pm on 5 October 2012.
(9)I will stand the matter over for directions to 9.30 am on 9 November 2012 before Justice Schmidt.
(10)I grant the parties liberty to apply to me on short notice.