Recent Wins

Injury to Brain During Epilepsy Testing – Negligent Hospital Treatment

Our client was a 20 year old woman whose epilepsy worsened following treatment she received at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital.

Our client underwent electroencephalographic monitoring at the Defendant’s hospital, a form of telemetry testing, in the hopes of determining whether or not her epileptic symptoms could be relieved via surgical intervention. The testing in question involved monitoring our client during a seizure, which would be induced as a result of medication withdrawal and sleep deprivation.

As a result of the Hospital’s negligence, the induced seizure was unable to be terminated within an appropriate amount of time, the necessary medication was not available, and the severity of her seizure was not recognised by treating staff.

As a result, our client suffered from an increase in her epilepsy – her seizures became more frequent and unpredictable in their nature.

This affected not only her day-to-day life, but her capacity for employment.

The Defendant acknowledged the duty of care owed to our client, and subsequent breach of that duty, however it was argued that the negligence in question did not contribute to any deterioration of the epilepsy.

We won the case in the Supreme Court after a lengthy trial with oversea witnesses and experts engaged on behalf of our client.

Our client received a significant award of damages. The Defendant subsequently appealed.

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Primary Judge, that, “but for” the negligence of the Hospital in performing the telemetry testing, our client would not have suffered an increase in the burden of her epilepsy.

The Defendant’s application for special leave to the High Court of Australia was dismissed in June 2018, thereby upholding the Court of Appeal’s decision and our client’s victory.

Failure to Inform of Risks – Unnecessary Surgical Intervention and the Over-Confident Surgeon

Sometimes patients feel forced into undergoing high-risk surgical procedures. There are many instances where such surgical intervention is completely unnecessary. These negligent practices are compounded when information regarding the risks involved is often inadequate and not actively provided by the treating medical practitioners.

Our client was a 66 year old woman who was left with a significant spinal cord injury and subsequent ongoing neurological issues as a result of an unnecessary surgical intervention (a thoracic decompression).

The procedure in question carried several significant risks, including paraplegia, which were not adequately explained to our client; nor were alternatives to surgery provided.

Our client felt lulled into a false sense of security by the surgeon.

Furthermore, we advanced the argument on behalf of our client that there was no evidence, let alone compelling evidence that warranted any such elective surgical intervention.

The matter settled at mediation, before proceeding to a final hearing.

Cyclist Struck by Bus – Severe Spinal Injuries

Sydney’s ongoing traffic congestion has caused many to turn to cycling as their means of daily transport; however this is not without risk.

Our client was a 40 year old man and an avid cyclist, who was involved in a peak hour collision with a bus along a busy Sydney road. Our client sustained a severe spinal injury, repaired by way of a multi-level fusion.

Our client’s injuries significantly impacted upon his ability to maintain his office job – sitting for prolonged periods would cause immense pain and discomfort.

The matter settled on the first day of a District Court hearing, after CCTV footage was played to the Court which highlighted the negligent actions of the bus driver in question.