Eldridge v Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children & anor [2008] NSWSC 886

Eldridge v Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children & anor [2008] NSWSC 886

Bryce Eldridge was entitled to an interim payment because the admitted breach and injury made it undeniable that $200,000 would be considerably exceeded by the ultimate assessment and was a reasonable proportion of damages likely to be recovered; s 82 did not confine the payment to current needs or pre-trial expenses. The parents were not entitled to interim payments because, on the paper evidence, conflicting psychiatric opinions meant the Court could not be satisfied that their derivative nervous shock claims would succeed, rather than probably succeed, and John Eldridge's donated-kidney claim was novel and unsuitable for determination on the interim motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Interim Payments in Professional Negligence/personal Injury Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Under S 82 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005
Outcome
Interim payment ordered for Bryce Eldridge; interim payments refused for Jillian Coulton and John Eldridge; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['interim Payments' 'reasonable Proportion of Likely Damages' 'derivative Nervous Shock Claims' 'medical Negligence' 'capacity to Repay']
['civil Procedure' 'damages' 'negligence' 'professional Negligence' 'personal Injury'] ['interim Payments' 'reasonable Proportion of Likely Damages' 'derivative Nervous Shock Claims' 'medical Negligence' 'capacity to Repay']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Seeking Interim Payments in Professional Negligence/personal Injury Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Under S 82 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should order interim payments to the three plaintiffs pursuant to s 82 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.' 'Whether an interim payment for Bryce Eldridge should be limited by his needs up to trial or by non-controversial current expenses.' 'Whether Jillian Coulton and John Eldridge showed that, if the proceedings went to trial, they would obtain judgment for substantial damages against the second defendant.' "Whether the claimed derivative psychiatric injuries and John Eldridge's claimed physical loss of a donated kidney could support interim payments on the motion evidence."]

Ratio Decidendi

Bryce Eldridge was entitled to an interim payment because the admitted breach and injury made it undeniable that $200,000 would be considerably exceeded by the ultimate assessment and was a reasonable proportion of damages likely to be recovered; s 82 did not confine the payment to current needs or pre-trial expenses. The parents were not entitled to interim payments because, on the paper evidence, conflicting psychiatric opinions meant the Court could not be satisfied that their derivative nervous shock claims would succeed, rather than probably succeed, and John Eldridge's donated-kidney claim was novel and unsuitable for determination on the interim motion.

Court Disposition

Interim payment ordered for Bryce Eldridge; interim payments refused for Jillian Coulton and John Eldridge; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s 82 of the Civil Procedure Act, the second defendant is to pay into Court the sum of $200,000 as interim damages for the benefit of the plaintiff Bryce Eldridge.' 'The said sum is to be paid out to the Public Trustee to deal with for the benefit of Bryce Eldridge.' 'The costs of the motion are to be...