Reid v Hanafi [2026] TASSC 46 (Link to AUSTLII).
With thanks to Lucinda Gunning for drawing attention to this decision, where the plaintiff alleged a delay in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis and treatment with disease modifying treatments resulted in formation of lesion, associated with acute relapse.
The court discussed the correct approach to the application of s 22 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (Tas) and adopted a similar path to that in NSW such that the key the question in this case was whether the defendant acted in a manner that (at the time the service was provided) was widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion as competent professional practice.
The court commented at [2]:
In the period from 22 April 2014 until the plaintiff’s attendance at the hospital on 17 August 2015, she had been a patient of Dr Robina Hanafi, the defendant. The defendant is a general practitioner. The plaintiff attended the defendant’s medical practice, Moonah Doctors, on twelve occasions in the period between April 2014 and August 2015. On a number of those occasions, the plaintiff presented with symptoms now understood to have been neurological. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant’s investigation and treatment of those symptoms was negligent. It is alleged that the defendant’s negligence led to a delay in the plaintiff being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, which in turn has resulted in delayed treatment and a worse outcome.
Havng examined the evidence, the court was not not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the defendant breached the modified standard of care towards the plaintiff on any occasion on or after 22 April 2014 ([304]).
Nor was the court persuaded that on the balance of probabilities that any delay in diagnosis or treatment was a necessary element of the plaintiff’s harm, however described ([365]).
The plaintiff’s action was dismissed.
[BillMaddensWordpress #2569]