Category Archives: LAW FIRM

Damages, LAW FIRM, Medical negligence, Negligence

Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38

ON 16 JULY 2003, the High Court of Australia delivered Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38; 215 CLR 1; 199 ALR 131; 77 ALJR 1312 (16 July 2003).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2003/38.html

A woman went to a doctor for a sterilisation procedure as she and her husband did not intend to have any more children. She told the doctor that she believed that her right fallopian tube had been removed when she was 15. The doctor performed a tubal ligation on the left fallopian tube and made no further investigation regarding the right tube. As it turned out, the right tube had not been removed and the woman later fell pregnant, unintentionally.

The woman and her husband sued the doctor and the State of Queensland (who ran the hospital) seeking damages for negligence on the grounds that the doctor failed to advise the woman of the risks of conceiving without specific investigation of the right fallopian tube.

The woman and her husband were awarded damages for the costs of raising and maintaining the healthy but unintended child, despite those damages being for pure economic loss (ie not arising from any actual injury).

The Civil Liability Acts have since prohibited awards of damages for the costs of rearing or maintaining a child or the parents’ loss of earnings whilst rearing or maintaining a child.

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

Employment Law, LAW FIRM

Wall’s Gifts and Tobacco Pty Limited v Warringah Mall Pty Limited [2003] NSWADT 161

Wall’s Gifts and Tobacco Pty Limited v Warringah Mall Pty Limited and Anor [2003] NSWADT 161 (4 July 2003)

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

Appeals, Evidence, LAW FIRM

Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22 | 30 April 2003

On 30 April 2003, the High Court of Australia delivered Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; 214 CLR 118; 197 ALR 201; 77 ALJR 989 (30 April 2003).

“Appeal – Rehearing – Review of findings of fact based on trial judge’s assessment of credibility of witnesses – Whether findings inconsistent with incontrovertibly established facts – Power of appellate court to set aside findings.

Appeal – Issue not raised at trial – Where argued that expert report based on matters not proved or supported by the evidence – Whether re-examination of facts by appellate court appropriate.

Appeal – Rehearing – Substitution of judgment of appellate court for that of trial judge – Whether re-trial an appropriate remedy.”

The court affirmed the principles, developed over many previous cases, to be applied by appellant courts when considering whether or not to overturn the findings of credit made by a trial judge.

An appellate court must be satisfied that the findings are “glaringly improbable” or “contrary to compelling inferences”; or that the judge has “failed to use” or “palpably misused” his or her advantage or acted on facts which were inconsistent with the evidence or were glaringly improbable..”

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2003/22.html

Lawyers

1300 00 2088

LAW FIRM, Planning Law

Fitness First Australia PL v Port Phillip CC [2003] VCAT 960

Fitness First Australia PL v Port Phillip CC [2003] VCAT 960 (30 April 2003)

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Aviation law, LAW FIRM

Malaysia Airline System BHD (New Zealand) Limited v Malone [2013] NZEmpC 66

Malaysia Airline System BHD (New Zealand) Limited v Malone Ac33/03 [2003] NZEmpC 66; [2003] 1 ERNZ 494 (28 April 2003).

http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZEmpC/2003/66.html

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

LAW FIRM, Planning Law

Helen Lesnewski v Mosman Municipal Council and Anor

Helen Lesnewski v Mosman Municipal Council and Anor [2003] NSWLEC 407 (9 April 2003).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWLEC/2003/407.html

Civil procedure, Damages, LAW FIRM, Law reform, Negligence

Civil LIability Act 2003 (Qld)

ON 4 MARCH 2003, the Queensland Parliament passed the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld).  The Act is taken to have commenced on 2 December 2002.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

Employment Law, LAW FIRM

Australian Workers’ Union, New South Wales Branch and Zoological Parks Board of New South Wales [2013] NSWIRCom 49

Australian Workers’ Union, New South Wales Branch and Zoological Parks Board of New South Wales [2003] NSWIRComm 49 (13 March 2003)

Lawyers 1300 00 2088

Duty of Care, LAW FIRM, Negligence, Personal Injury, Torts

NSW v Lepore [2003] HCA 4

ON THIS DAY in 2003, the High Court of Australia delivered New South Wales v Lepore [2003] HCA 4; 212 CLR 511; 195 ALR 412; 77 ALJR 558 (6 February 2003).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2003/4.html

Lawyers

Sydney, Australia

1300 00 2088

LAW FIRM, Planning Law

Innovac Dyer Pty Limited v Mosman Council

Innovac Dyer Pty Limited v Mosman Council [2003] NSWLEC 7 (4 February 2003).

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWLEC/2003/7.html