Coote v Dr Kelly [2012] NSWSC 219

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Coote v Dr Kelly [2012] NSWSC 219 Hearing dates: 27 February 2012, 28 February 2012, 29 February 2012, 1 March 2012, 2 March 2012, 5 March 2012 Decision date: 14 March 2012 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Schmidt J Decision: 1. Judgment for the defendant. 2. The usual order would be that costs follow the event. The parties should approach if they wish to be heard on costs. Catchwords: TORTS - negligence - medical negligence - whether general practitioner made a wrong diagnosis - a lesion on the foot diagnosed as a plantar wart - whether there was a misdiagnosis of the lesion - whether it was an acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) - whether there was failure to consider ALM as a differential diagnosis - whether there was failure to refer the plaintiff for specialist investigation - whether there was a failure to perform a punch biopsy of the lesion - plaintiff suffered a plantar wart and also had an ALM - duty of care owed - negligence established - whether there would have been a different outcome if ALM had been earlier treated - causation not established - section 50 of the Civil Liability Act - judgment for defendant - costs

EVIDENCE - admissibility and relevance - opinion evidence - medical evidence - objections to expert evidence

EVIDENCE - witnesses - credit - credibility of evidence - reliability of evidence Legislation Cited: Civil Liability Act 2002 Evidence Act 1995 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Cases Cited: Adeels Palace Pty Ltd v Moubarak (2009) 239 CLR 420; [2009] HCA 48 Amaca Pty Ltd v Booth [2011] HCA 53; (2011) 86 ALJR 172 Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar [2011] HCA 21; (2011) 243 CLR 588 Onassis and Calerropolous v Vergiottis [1968] 21 Lloyds LR 403 Seltsam Pty Ltd v McGuiness [2000] NSWCA 29 (2000) 49 NSWLR 262 Sherry v Australasian Conference Association (trading as Sydney Adventist Hospital) [2006] NSWSC 75 Strong v Woolworths Ltd [2012] HCA 5 Sydney South West Area Health Service v Stamoulis [2009] NSWCA 153 Tabet v Gett [2010] HCA 12; (2010) 240 CLR 537 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Malcolm Coote (Plaintiff) Dr Steven Kelly (Defendant Representation: Counsel: Mr M Williams SC with Mr O'Keefe Mr J Morris with Mr T French Solicitors: Stacks Goudkamp (Plaintiff) Norton Rose Australia (Defendant) File Number(s): 2011/339988 Publication restriction: None