Cleary v Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District (No 2) [2026] NSWSC 618 (Link to Caselaw).
In this second application for approval of a settlement by a person under a disability there were shortcomings in the material provided, precluding a determination of whether the compromise is in the best interests of the plaintiff. Such matters turn on their own facts, however Chen J made some comments as to what may be required in general. The issues appear to have been:
- The solicitor for the plaintiff described the claim as involving “complex medical and factual issues”, yet they were only identified in exceedingly general terms and, even then, there was no analysis of them by reference to the evidence.
- A joint advice from senior and junior counsel was only 3 pages in length. There was a lack of detail and analysis of the evidence and it was not clear what material was provided to counsel.
- Some expert opinions were included without being referred to in the joint advice.
For those reasons it was not possible for the court to determine, with the appropriate assistance, whether the proposed resolution was in the best interests of the plaintiff.
See also an earlier application in Cleary v Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District [2025] NSWSC 1192.
[BillMaddensWordpress #2536]