10 Jul 2019
Because the medical treatment and the decision not to resect in 2016 complied with accepted professional standards and guidelines, the decision did not constitute an incorrect decision or departure from professional standards and therefore did not cause a treatment injury under ss32 and 33; appeal dismissed.
7 Dec 2017
Judge Powell lawfully exercised fact‑finding by preferring contemporaneous specialist reports over a belatedly changed opinion; Dr Broadbent's 2014 conclusions were discounted because they conflicted with earlier reports and contemporaneous records, lacked new evidence or explanation, and therefore did not raise a question of law warranting special leave under s162; application dismissed.
26 Jun 2017
Judge Sinclair held that Judge Powell did not commit an error of law: he conducted a detailed, rational analysis of the medical evidence, was entitled to prefer the initial specialist reports over Dr Broadbent's belated post-2011 reports which lacked reconciliation with earlier opinions and offered no new evidence, and therefore the application for leave to appeal was properly dismissed.
3 May 2017
The Court refused to answer the preliminary legal question posed because it would require resolution of contested factual issues (the character and basis of the alleged delay and rarity of the mishap) and it would be inappropriate and potentially inefficient to decide the question in isolation; the matter is to proceed to a full substantive hearing in accordance with the High Court remittal.
30 Sept 2015
Weighing contemporaneous specialist reports against later, inconsistent criticism, the court found no proven failure to observe the requisite standard of care nor a rare adverse consequence of treatment; expert evidence did not establish on the balance of probabilities that treatment caused the appellant's cerebral palsy, therefore the appeal is dismissed.
11 Sept 2015
Appeal allowed because the District Court applied too stringent a causation test inconsistent with Ambros; there was at least a possible causal link per expert evidence and the matter is remitted to the District Court to reconsider causation solely on medical mishap grounds including obtaining evidence on the rarity requirement (<=1%) while noting no medical error was established.
26 Mar 2015
Leave to appeal was granted because the Court of Appeal's decision in Ambros altered the legal approach to causation such that a possible causal connection may suffice to establish causation, and because arguable legal questions remain concerning treatment/medical mishap and the rarity requirement that merit appellate reconsideration.
20 Aug 2010
Given accepted biological plausibility and the demonstrated temporal connection (onset within two weeks, within vaccine incubation period), the balance of probabilities supports that the rubella vaccination caused the appellant's rheumatoid arthritis; accordingly the appellant satisfied the statutory tests for medical mishap and is entitled to cover under the relevant ACC provisions.
17 Jun 2009
Appellant failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that the death resulted from medical error or from a medical mishap meeting the statutory rarity and severity criteria; independent specialist evidence supported that treatment met accepted standards and the fatal events were attributable to the underlying disease process and embolic infarction with hemorrhagic transformation rather than negligent treatment, therefore ACC's decision to decline cover is upheld.
24 Mar 2009
The court upheld ACC's decision: the knee malalignment was within expected outcome range for total knee replacement, was not shown to be 'severe' or 'rare' as required by s34, had no causal connection to the accepted nerve injury, and therefore did not qualify as medical mishap or medical misadventure warranting cover.