Amanda Jurkovic v Paul Hubbard [2013] NSWDC 21

Amanda Jurkovic v Paul Hubbard [2013] NSWDC 21

The defendant was negligent because he failed to obtain any adequate history, including whether the plaintiff had undergone breast implant surgery, and then used a non-standard and inappropriate manipulation that forced the plaintiff's breasts into the treatment table. That procedure caused the rupture or damage to the capsule and the prolapse or rotation of the plaintiff's right breast implant. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to a verdict and substantial compensation, including 25% of a most extreme case for non-economic loss and the reasonable cost of surgery by her treating surgeon.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Negligence Claim Arising From Chiropractic Treatment / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Entry of Judgment and Costs Deferred for Further Submissions
Outcome
Verdict for the plaintiff; judgment and costs orders deferred pending further submissions.
Legal Topics
['chiropractic Manipulation' 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'breast Implant Displacement' 'non Economic Loss' 'medical History Taking']
['personal Injury' 'negligence' 'health Practitioner Liability'] ['chiropractic Manipulation' 'duty of Care' 'causation' 'breast Implant Displacement' 'non Economic Loss' 'medical History Taking']

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

Personal Injury Negligence Claim Arising From Chiropractic Treatment / Principal Judgment After Hearing; Entry of Judgment and Costs Deferred for Further Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant chiropractor failed to take an adequate medical history before treating the plaintiff.' "Whether the defendant used an inappropriate chiropractic procedure that compressed the plaintiff's breasts onto the treatment table." "Whether the chiropractic manipulation caused the plaintiff's right breast implant to rotate or prolapse." 'What damages the plaintiff was entitled to for non-economic loss and corrective operative treatment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant was negligent because he failed to obtain any adequate history, including whether the plaintiff had undergone breast implant surgery, and then used a non-standard and inappropriate manipulation that forced the plaintiff's breasts into the treatment table. That procedure caused the rupture or damage to the capsule and the prolapse or rotation of the plaintiff's right breast implant. The plaintiff was therefore entitled to a verdict and substantial compensation, including 25% of a most extreme case for non-economic loss and the reasonable cost of surgery by her treating surgeon.

Court Disposition

Verdict for the plaintiff; judgment and costs orders deferred pending further submissions.

Orders

  • ['Verdict for the plaintiff.' 'The Court did not enter judgment or make an order for costs until the parties had considered the judgment and had an opportunity to make further submissions.']