Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bupa HI Pty Ltd v Chang [2019] FCAFC 180 Appeal from: Bupa HI Pty Ltd v Andrew Chang Services Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 2033
File number: NSD 94 of 2019
Judges: GLEESON, O'CALLAGHAN AND JACKSON JJ
Date of judgment: 17 October 2019
Catchwords: HEALTH LAW – proper interpretation and application of Medicare Benefits Schedule – claim by private health insurer under the Australian Consumer Law against ophthalmologist and his service company in respect of allegedly overpaid amounts – primary judge dismissed insurer's claim – appeal dismissed CONTRACT – whether insurer formed a "reasonable opinion" that conduct of ophthalmologist "may adversely impact" insurer's "goodwill, reputation or business" thus entitling it to "deregister" him from its "Gap Scheme" – primary judge made declaration that insurer had breached its contract with the ophthalmologist – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 24(1A)
Cases cited: Australian Securities & Investment Commission v Kobelt [2019] HCA 18; (2019) 93 ALJR 743 Australian Workers' Union v Bowen (No 2) (1948) 77 CLR 601 Cordon Investment Pty Ltd v Lesdor Properties Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 184 EFG Australia Ltd v Kennedy [1999] NSWSC 922 Interstar Wholesale Finance Pty Ltd v Integral Home Loans Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 310; (2008) 257 ALR 292 Paciocco v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2015) 236 FCR 199
Date of hearing: 5 August 2019
Registry: New South Wales
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate