We received instructions to investigate a claim relating to treatment provided to our client at a private hospital over her initial 36 hour admission. Our client presented for treatment to a private hospital with a history of feeling lightheaded and uncoordinated with her dominant hand, feeling forgetful, and confused.
We prepared a case on the basis that the records from the hospital indicated that there were a number of missed opportunities by the attending doctors to diagnose and treat our client for stroke symptoms and as a result of these missed opportunities, our client suffered irreversible and irreparable disabilities and injuries. Our client’s injuries were to such a catastrophic level, she was unable to ever return to work in childcare and required 24-hour care in a specialised home.
Proceedings were commenced against the Private Hospital in the Supreme Court of NSW. In order to prepare this matter for hearing a vast number of expert reports were required. We initially required reports from an Emergency Physician addressing what assessments and investigations should have been conducted at the time that our client arrived at hospital. Secondly, we required expert evidence from a Neurologist, outlining what an attending Neurologist should have arranged by way of examinations and investigations (e.g.: radiological investigations). Thirdly, we required expert opinions from Neurosurgeons commenting on whether those investigations had of been conducted (as recommended by the Neurologist).
The Hospital’s response was to deny any liability and in fact suggest that they were not the proper defendant, but rather, the individual attending doctors.
The defendant Hospital obtained evidence that was in direct conflict with our experts, despite this the Hospital indicated that they were prepared to consider an informal settlement between the parties. Accordingly, a Mediation was arranged. Unfortunately, the representatives for the Hospital used the opportunity to emphasise their view that we should join additional defendants in the proceedings.
We maintained our stance and asserted that the attending doctors would be seen by the Court as employees of the Hospital. While these arguments were ongoing between the parties, we had obtained a number of reports addressing our client’s ongoing injuries, her need for high-level care for the remainder of her life, and her significant loss of income.
Essentially there was no disagreement between the parties as to our client’s injuries, the main issues between the parties were whether our client’s injuries were a result of the delay in treatment (noting that the evidence suggested that she had suffered a stroke prior to her arrival).
Our expert evidence indicated that our client, while likely to have suffered some ongoing physical disability, would not have required such a high level of care. The matter was listed for hearing in February 2021 for a 2-week hearing. The court directed the parties to participate in a Mediation prior to the commencement of the hearing.
At the Mediation there was a significant dispute between the Hospital and the doctors against which the Hospital had made cross-claims against. Further, the ongoing issue between the parties as to precisely what could be attributed to the delay of treatment of 36 hours.
Demonstrating that a doctor fell short of their duty of care can be a challenging process. While most doctors try their best to correctly diagnose conditions and provide timely medical treatment, they can’t always be right. In every state, protections are in place to shield practitioners from some litigation. These give practitioners peace of mind on the job and protect hospitals that are doing their best with limited resources. However, these laws also set the bar for receiving compensation incredibly high.
Overall, to win a favorable judgment, you must be able to prove Duty, Breach, and Damages.
If you have been injured or an existing condition has got worse following a medical procedure, or even just a visit to the doctor, then you may have been the victim of medical negligence and you may be eligible to make medical negligence claims against the professional who caused your injury.
If you can first show that you have suffered harm, and secondly, that a medical professional failed in their duty of care towards you then you may be entitled to compensation.
The length of time required to resolve medical negligence claims will depend on a number of factors. Chief among them are the complexities of your particular case and how it is ultimately resolved.
Typically though – based on a wealth of experience fighting and winning medical malpractice cases – our medical negligence lawyers will advise you that it will take between 12 and 24 months to resolve your case.
Cases that are resolved through mediation tend to be a lot quicker. The opposite is true of cases that go to the Supreme Court, where the likely time frame from your first meeting with us to reaching a conclusion extends to 36 months.
John’s Journey:Overcoming adversity to secure a $500k TPD Claim Jump to Result This image does not depict our actual client. John’s story In July 2017,
Case Overview Our client presented to a vascular surgeon, seeking treatment of her varicose veins in her right leg. Following the surgeon’s recommendation, our client
Case Overview A woman from Green Valley was a passenger in a car when the driver lost control of the vehicle, leading to a collision
Case Overview At the time of her injury, our client was working as a cleaner at a private residence in Kurrajong. During the course of
Case Overview We acted for a client from Western Sydney who was involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. The other driver collided into our
Case Overview We acted for a client from Coffs Harbour who was involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. The driver failed to give way
In the spirit of reconciliation GMP Law acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea, and community. We pay our respects to their Elders past, present, and emerging, and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.
Your location is currently:
