Miller v Jones (No. 6) [2020] NSWSC 736

Miller v Jones (No. 6) [2020] NSWSC 736

The Court accepted Dr Journeaux's evidence, supported by Dr Caldwell, Dr Musgrove and the defendant's own description, that the ACL graft was placed past the 11 o'clock position and closer to the 12 o'clock position, making it too vertical and outside the appropriate range for ACL reconstruction. That malpositioning amounted to fault under the applicable French law, did not produce optimal strength in the plaintiff's knee, caused damage and caused the plaintiff to lose the opportunity to return to his rugby league career. The plaintiff's entitlement was not limited to the period before the 6 September 2011 training incident, but damages were to be discounted by 50% because infection also...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Torts Medical Negligence; Private International Law / Principal Judgment After Hearing on Liability and Damages
Outcome
Verdict entered in favour of the plaintiff; final judgment sum to be calculated in accordance with the judgment; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['negligence by Medical Practitioner' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'causation' 'loss of Chance' 'assessment of Damages Under French Law' 'acl Reconstruction Surgery']
['torts' 'medical Negligence' 'private International Law' 'damages'] ['negligence by Medical Practitioner' 'breach of Duty of Care' 'causation' 'loss of Chance' 'assessment of Damages Under French Law' 'acl Reconstruction Surgery']

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

Torts Medical Negligence; Private International Law / Principal Judgment After Hearing on Liability and Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant breached his duty of care by performing the ACL reconstruction so that the graft was highly vertical and malpositioned.' "Whether any breach caused the plaintiff's ongoing disabilities and loss of opportunity to pursue a professional rugby league career." "Whether the plaintiff's damages should be discounted because infection also contributed to his outcome." 'How damages were to be assessed under French law.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court accepted Dr Journeaux's evidence, supported by Dr Caldwell, Dr Musgrove and the defendant's own description, that the ACL graft was placed past the 11 o'clock position and closer to the 12 o'clock position, making it too vertical and outside the appropriate range for ACL reconstruction. That malpositioning amounted to fault under the applicable French law, did not produce optimal strength in the plaintiff's knee, caused damage and caused the plaintiff to lose the opportunity to return to his rugby league career. The plaintiff's entitlement was not limited to the period before the 6 September 2011 training incident, but damages were to be discounted by 50% because infection also...

Court Disposition

Verdict entered in favour of the plaintiff; final judgment sum to be calculated in accordance with the judgment; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['I enter a verdict in favour of the plaintiff.' 'I direct the parties to bring in Short Minutes of Order calculating the final judgment sum in accordance with this judgment.' 'I stand the matter over for further directions before me until 10 July 2020 at 9:30am.' 'I reserve all questions of costs pending further...