On 19 May 2022, the NSW Parliament passed the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2022 which will allow eligible persons access to voluntary assisted dying services from 28 November 2023.  This will effectively give those persons control over the timing of their death.

The Act has been designed to prioritise personal autonomy, and to provide those in the end stages of life with greater levels of support and medical attention (including palliative care) for the purpose of minimising suffering.

Under the Act, voluntary assisted dying is not considered suicide, or an attempt by a person to cause serious physical harm upon him or herself for the purpose of the Mental Health Act 2007.

This article highlights the 7 July 2022 decision of the Supreme Court of NSW in Parkes v Mt Owen Pty Ltd & Anor [2022] NSWSC 909, which affirms the principle that vicarious liability is not dependent on contractual arrangements, but rather on a question of fact.

This article discusses the 18 February 2022 decision in Dhupar v Lee [2022] NSWCA 15, which illustrates that damages are available for economic loss arising from an injury suffered by a mother as the result of giving birth.

This case note discusses the 14 April 2022 decision in Pridgeon v Medical Council of New South Wales [2022] NSWCA 60.

This particular matter arises from extraordinary circumstances that may never again be seen in quite the same way. Nevertheless, the case has broad application due to its interpretation of the scope of the “public interest” aspect of s.150 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW), and its proper use.

The Practitioner in this matter, Dr Pridgeon, is a general practitioner who formerly worked in Grafton, located in northern New South Wales.  On 29 October 2018, the NSW Medical Council suspended his registration under section 150. 

The Practitioner sought reviews of the decision from the Council, but the suspension was affirmed. He then appealed to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed his appeal.

The Practitioner appealed to the NSW Court of Appeal.

Holman Webb Lawyers is pleased to announce a range of promotions across our Sydney office – effective 1 July 2022:
 
These promotions reflect the commitment and contribution each person has made and continues to make to the fabric of the firm, our values and development.

The 17 June 2022 Federal Court of Australia decision in Zurich Australian Insurance Ltd v Atradius Credito Y Caucion S.A. De Seguros Y Reaseguros [2022] FCA 709 has made clear that care must be taken when bringing proceedings in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The Federal Court has made clear that the FCFCoA only has jurisdiction to hear and determine claims when power has been expressly given to it pursuant to legislation; and that absent such power, proceedings in that jurisdiction are a nullity.

On the contrary, the Federal Court has clear and undisputed jurisdiction arising in the exercise of Federal civil jurisdiction irrespective of any specific grant under legislation.

Click through to download Holman Webb Lawyers' new Minor Injury Guide, which assists those working within the CTP Insurance space in determining whether an injured person has sustained minor or non-minor injuries for the purpose of your liability decisions.  

Presented by CTP Insurance Partner Stephanie Davis on Thursday 16 June 2022, this webinar recording provides an overview of how the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017, Motor Accident Injuries Regulation 2017 and the Motor Accidents Guidelines work together to define minor injuries and the procedure for assessment of Minor Injury Disputes.

Click through to watch this webinar, and to download Holman Webb's recently published Minor Injury Guide, which highlights some recent Review Panel decisions concerning Minor Injury Disputes.

Important takeaways from the decision in Talevska v AAI Limited t/as AAMI [2022] NSWPICMP 82:

• Only one injury needs to fall outside the definition of “minor injury” to entitle the Claimant to ongoing statutory benefits and common law damages.
   
• The Review Panel dismissed an Application to assess other injuries on the basis it was no longer relevant.

Important takeaways from the decision in Muradi v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2022] NSWPICMP 59:

• The Review Panel had regard to various studies addressing annular tears and determined that although the accident could have caused an annular tear, it did not cause the Claimant’s annular tear.
   
• The Review Panel considered that the Claimant’s symptoms were more likely attributable to damage to other musculoskeletal structures and psychological distress, than the annular tears.