THE CANTERBURY HOSPITAL v CAPPELLETTO [1991] NSWCA 44

THE CANTERBURY HOSPITAL vy CAPPELLETTO

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

KIRBY P, MAHONEY and CLARKE JJA 17 and 18 April 1991, 17 May 1991

[1991] NSWCA 44

NEGLIGENCE — medical negligence alleged misdirection of jury whether evidence to sustain verdict — held: No error. DAMAGES — proper approach to excessive general damages but on reassessment economic loss component increased — verdict stands — Robinson v Riley [1971] JURY — components of verdicts. Otis Elevators Pty Ltd v Zitis (1986) 5 NSWLR 171 distinguished. NEGLIGENCE — medical negligence — women patient at public hospital undergoes removal of gall bladder — develops bleeding at operation and thereafter — treated for pulmonary embolism — major bleeding causes crisis and debilitation candidiasis results from extended treatment — candidiasis causes near total blindness — patient sues hospital and honorary surgeon who supervised operation and subsequent treatment — trial before Loveday J and jury — jury dismisses claim against honorary surgeon — awards $493,750 against hospital for negligence — on appeal — held: (1) There was no misdirection to the jury by the trial judge on the allegations of negligence relied upon by the patient; (2) There was evidence upon each of the grounds left to the jury of negligence which it was open to the jury to conclude was causally related to the debilitation which caused the condition resulting in blindness; (3) There was no such inconsistency between the jury's verdicts in favour of the surgeon and against the hospital as to require judgment for the hospital or a retrial; (4) It was open to the jury, and available in the evidence, to find in favour of the surgeon but against the hospital upon that ground of negligence which related to the critical failure of the hospital staff (other than the surgeon) to provide prompt attention when the patient demonstrated frank haemorrhage which indicated to reasonable medical opinion the urgent need for a change of treatment, which change was delayed; (5) Accordingly, the judgment in favour of the patient, as entered following the jury's verdict, was sustained and would not be disturbed.