Rice v Ghabrial [2016] NSWSC 313

Rice v Ghabrial [2016] NSWSC 313

The proposed interrogatories concerned matters central to the pleaded issues, including each defendant's knowledge, training, experience, role in the operation and what occurred in the operating theatre. Those matters were beyond the plaintiff's knowledge and could not otherwise be obtained except by interrogatories. They were therefore necessary for a fair trial, and the difficulty or impossibility of obtaining the information otherwise, together with the importance of the issues, constituted special reasons justifying leave under r 22.1.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Common Law Claim for Damages Arising Out of Bodily Injury Alleging Medical Negligence / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for Leave to Administer Interrogatories Under R 22.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedural Rules 2005
Outcome
Plaintiff granted leave to administer interrogatories to the first, second and third defendants; defendants ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the motion.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'leave to Administer Interrogatories' 'necessary for a Fair Trial' 'special Reasons' 'operating Theatre Evidence']
['practice and Procedure' 'personal Injury' 'medical Negligence'] ['interrogatories' 'leave to Administer Interrogatories' 'necessary for a Fair Trial' 'special Reasons' 'operating Theatre Evidence']

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

Common Law Claim for Damages Arising Out of Bodily Injury Alleging Medical Negligence / Plaintiff's Notice of Motion for Leave to Administer Interrogatories Under R 22.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedural Rules 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave under r 22.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedural Rules 2005 to administer interrogatories to the first, second and third defendants.' 'Whether the proposed interrogatories were necessary in the sense of being reasonably required or legally ancillary to a fair trial.' 'Whether special reasons existed in a personal injury proceeding to justify the making of an order for interrogatories.' "Whether the plaintiff's lack of knowledge of events in the operating theatre and of each doctor's knowledge, experience, training and role justified interrogatories."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed interrogatories concerned matters central to the pleaded issues, including each defendant's knowledge, training, experience, role in the operation and what occurred in the operating theatre. Those matters were beyond the plaintiff's knowledge and could not otherwise be obtained except by interrogatories. They were therefore necessary for a fair trial, and the difficulty or impossibility of obtaining the information otherwise, together with the importance of the issues, constituted special reasons justifying leave under r 22.1.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff granted leave to administer interrogatories to the first, second and third defendants; defendants ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of the motion.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to r 22.1 of the Uniform Civil Procedural Rules 2005, the plaintiff be granted leave to administer interrogatories to the first, second and third defendants.' 'The first defendant, within twenty one (21) days, is to provide verified answers to interrogatories in the form of the draft interrogatories...