Moss v Coghill [2022] NSWSC 1224

Moss v Coghill [2022] NSWSC 1224

Because the plaintiff had relocated to Canada and that relocation should not disadvantage the defendant, and because Ms Caukill's opinion supported concern that an audiovisual assessment would not adequately substitute for an in-person home assessment, the plaintiff was directed to submit to an occupational therapy examination in Canada, with the extension of time confined to occupational therapy evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Medical Negligence Claim for Damages / Procedural Notice of Motion for Plaintiff to Submit to Occupational Therapy Examination and Related Extension of Time
Outcome
Defendant's application granted with limitations; costs of the application to be the defendant's costs in the proceedings.
Legal Topics
['medical Examination of Plaintiff' 'occupational Therapy Evidence' 'overseas Plaintiff' 'audio Visual Examination' 'expert Evidence' 'costs in Proceedings']
['negligence' 'civil Procedure' 'medical Negligence'] ['medical Examination of Plaintiff' 'occupational Therapy Evidence' 'overseas Plaintiff' 'audio Visual Examination' 'expert Evidence' 'costs in Proceedings']

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

Medical Negligence Claim for Damages / Procedural Notice of Motion for Plaintiff to Submit to Occupational Therapy Examination and Related Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be directed to submit to an in-person occupational therapy examination in Canada by an additional specialist retained by the defendant.' "Whether an updated occupational therapy assessment by audio visual link with the defendant's existing occupational therapist would be adequate." 'Whether the extension of time sought should be confined to occupational therapy evidence rather than primary quantum evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiff had relocated to Canada and that relocation should not disadvantage the defendant, and because Ms Caukill's opinion supported concern that an audiovisual assessment would not adequately substitute for an in-person home assessment, the plaintiff was directed to submit to an occupational therapy examination in Canada, with the extension of time confined to occupational therapy evidence.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application granted with limitations; costs of the application to be the defendant's costs in the proceedings.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff is to submit to a medical examination with Tania Percy, occupation therapist, on 6 October 2022 at 10:00am, to be undertaken at the plaintiff's residence or as otherwise agreed as to both time and location between the parties." 'Direct that that the extension of time sought in prayer 2 of the notice...