McDonnell v Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Healrh Service [2009] NSWSC 1364

McDonnell v Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Healrh Service [2009] NSWSC 1364

The notice of motion was dismissed because liability and causation were not sufficiently discrete from quantum: the plaintiffs and most of the doctors would have to give evidence in both trials, the causation issue involved credibility matters better evaluated on the full evidence, and the Court was not satisfied that separate determination would lead to substantial savings in time and expense.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Proceeding; Application for Separate Determination of Issues / Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion Filed 11 November 2009 Seeking Separate Determination of Liability and Causation From Other Issues in the Trial Pursuant to R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Outcome
Plaintiffs' notice of motion dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['separate Determination of Issues' 'liability and Causation' 'quantum of Damages' 'careless Advice, Statements and Non Disclosure' 'pregnancy and Down Syndrome Risk' 'case Management and Proportionality of Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'torts' 'negligence' 'professional Negligence'] ['separate Determination of Issues' 'liability and Causation' 'quantum of Damages' 'careless Advice, Statements and Non Disclosure' 'pregnancy and Down Syndrome Risk' 'case Management and Proportionality of Costs']

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

Professional Negligence Proceeding; Application for Separate Determination of Issues / Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion Filed 11 November 2009 Seeking Separate Determination of Liability and Causation From Other Issues in the Trial Pursuant to R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the questions of liability and causation should be determined separately from the other issues in the trial pursuant to r 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005.' 'Whether there was a sufficient demarcation between liability and causation issues and quantum issues to make separate determination just, efficient and economical.' "Whether causation, including the first plaintiff's evidence as to what she would have done if advised of the risk, involved credibility issues better determined with the full evidence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The notice of motion was dismissed because liability and causation were not sufficiently discrete from quantum: the plaintiffs and most of the doctors would have to give evidence in both trials, the causation issue involved credibility matters better evaluated on the full evidence, and the Court was not satisfied that separate determination would lead to substantial savings in time and expense.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' notice of motion dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiffs' notice of motion filed 11 November 2009 is dismissed." 'Costs are reserved.']