NSWNSWDC
Hope v Hunter and New England Area Health Service
[2009] NSWDC 307
District Court of NSW|2009-09-03|Before: Mr J
View original sourceAt a glance
Source factsCourt
District Court of NSW
Decision date
2009-09-03
Before
Mr J
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Judgment (117 paragraphs)
[1]
- For the reasons I have outlined above, I prefer the opinion of Associate Professor Connolly to the opinion of Associate Professor Haertsch on the issue of whether or not the intra-operative nerve and artery injury suffered by the plaintiff was an unacceptable result of the surgery for ganglion removal. I accept Associate Professor Connolly's conclusion that the result obtained by the plaintiff was unacceptable in that these structures were cut because the digital nerve and the digital artery were cut when these structures were not identified and protected before the removal of the ganglion as no surgeon of ordinary skill and competence would set out to cut these structures in the course of such an operation. I consider that result could have been conveniently and reasonably avoided if due care had been taken during the operation to identify and protect these structures.
[2]
- This conclusion is not the end of the analysis because the requirements of the Civil Liability Act 2002 have to be considered and met before a finally concluded view can be reached on the issue of liability.
[3]