TOON v CENTRAL ADELAIDE LOCAL HEALTH NETWORK [2025] SADC 98 (Link to AUSTLII).
With thanks to Tina Cockburn for drawing attention to this August 2025 South Australian decision.
The applicant claimed that medical staff at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital were in breach of their duty of care to him in that they and particularly Dr Chan, did not perform fasciotomy surgery to his injured left forearm in a timely manner; performed the first surgery in a negligent manner; delayed further surgery of the left forearm and generally failed to treat the applicant with due care and skill and in a manner that took into account his risk of harm.
Following consideration of the competing expert evidence, the applicant failed to make out any breach of duty on behalf of the respondent; nor did he make out causation in relation to his injuries.
The court considered ss 40-41 of the Civil Liability Act 1936 (SA), stating that those sections codified the duty of care of a medical practitioner as described by the High Court in Rogers v Whitaker. Ultimately the court concluded that that the respondent’s medical team, including Dr Chan, in all respects, performed a full forearm fasciotomy in a manner which was widely accepted in Australia, by other medical practitioners, as competent professional practice. ([609]).
Expert evidence issue
Arising from the evidence given by an expert witness, the court found it necessary to refer to the Expert Code of Conduct and UCR 74.7, noting that the witness had breached the code by failing to provide a supplementary report and failing to advise the plaintiff’s solicitor of a change in his opinion ([336], [338]).
Further commentary
Julie Kinnear & Holly McGillick have written a more detailed note on this decision (Link to Article).
[BillMaddensWordpress #2445]