Dean v Phung [2009] NSWSC 1333
Because the Defendant admitted liability for negligence by Amended Defence, but an outstanding limitation issue remained, the appropriate disposition was to list the proceedings for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing.
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 December 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Professional Negligence Claim by Patient Against Dentist / Principal Judgment After Defendant Admitted Liability, With an Outstanding Issue Under the Limitation Act 1969
- Outcome
- Proceedings listed for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing.
- Legal Topics
- ['dental Negligence' 'admission of Liability' 'limitation Issue' 'costs Directions']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Claim by Patient Against Dentist / Principal Judgment After Defendant Admitted Liability, With an Outstanding Issue Under the Limitation Act 1969
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Defendant was liable in negligence for dental and related treatment provided to the Plaintiff.' 'What directions and costs applications should follow after the Defendant admitted liability, with an outstanding issue under the Limitation Act 1969.']
Ratio Decidendi
Because the Defendant admitted liability for negligence by Amended Defence, but an outstanding limitation issue remained, the appropriate disposition was to list the proceedings for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing.
Court Disposition
Proceedings listed for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing.
Orders
- ['The proceedings are listed for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing before Johnson J.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Dean v Phung [2009] NSWSC 1333
HEARING DATE(S) : 25 March 2009, 26 March 2009, 27 March 2009
JUDGMENT DATE : 2 December 2009
JUDGMENT OF : Johnson J at 1
DECISION : See [7].
CATCHWORDS : NEGLIGENCE - claim by patient against dentist - negligent treatment - admission of liability
LEGISLATION CITED : Limitation Act 1969
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
CASES CITED : Dean v Phung [2009] NSWSC 201 Advanced Arbor Services Pty Ltd v Mark Phung [2009] NSWSC 1331
PARTIES : Todd Owen Dean (Plaintiff) Mark Phung (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20571/08
COUNSEL : Mr D Hooke (Plaintiff) Mr D Nock SC; Mr A Hourigan (Defendant)
SOLICITORS : Beilby Poulden Costello (Plaintiff) Guild Legal Limited (Defendant)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE LIST
Johnson J
2 December 2009
20571/08 Todd Owen Dean v Mark Phung
JUDGMENT 1 JOHNSON J: By Statement of Claim filed 18 December 2008, the Plaintiff, Todd Owen Dean, sues the Defendant, Mark Phung, a dental practitioner, for damages for professional negligence. 2 The Statement of Claim alleges that the Plaintiff suffered injuries to his teeth and jaw on 19 December 2001 when he was struck on the chin by a log in the course of his employment. It is alleged that the Plaintiff was referred to the Defendant for dental and related treatment and advice for the injury. On 16 January 2002, the Plaintiff first attended the Defendant's dental surgery and, until July 2003, the Defendant provided treatment to the Plaintiff. It is alleged that the Defendant's treatment of the Plaintiff was negligent and that the Plaintiff has suffered injury and loss as a result of that negligence. 3 On 11 March 2009, Hall J ordered that the issue of liability in these proceedings be tried at the same time as a related matter, Advanced Arbor Services Pty Ltd v Mark Phung (20006/08): Dean v Phung [2009] NSWSC 201. 4 On 25 March 2009, both matters came before me for hearing. This judgment should be read in conjunction with my judgment delivered today in Advanced Arbor Services Pty Ltd v Mark Phung [2009] NSWSC 1331. 5 At the hearing on 26 March 2009, senior counsel for the Defendant stated that he had "instructions to consent to a judgment in respect of liability" in this case (T98). By leave, the Defendant filed in Court an Amended Defence dated 26 March 2009 in this matter (T111). The effect of those amendments was that the Defendant admitted liability for negligence, but with an outstanding issue under the Limitation Act 1969. 6 In these circumstances, it was agreed by counsel for the Plaintiff and the Defendant that this matter should be listed for directions when judgment was handed down in the related proceedings (T112; T123). 7 Accordingly, I will list the proceedings for directions and for any application as to costs with respect to the hearing before me. **********
DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.