Opbroeck v Australian Capital Territory [2016] ACTSC 64 concerned an application for leave to amend a statement of claim in a birth trauma medical negligence claim. The allegation was one of delay in performing a caesarean section, with the amendments seeking to include allegations in respect of earlier antenatal management.

The defendant argued that the amendments constituted new causes of action, outside the limitation period: [16].  At [34] the court held that section 30B of the Limitation Act 1985 (ACT) applied because what must be alleged is the suffering of injury on the plaintiff’s birth. Any pre-birth injury is only part of the evidentiary chain leading to an individual’s injury post birth, hence an entitlement to sue. Watt v Rama was discussed (see [27]).

The defendant unsuccessfully opposed the amendments in respect of “pre-birth facts”, in the absence of relevant expert evidence.

Leave was granted, subject to the exclusion of some allegations because of prejudice arising from the elapse of time.

 

 

One thought on “At what point does a child plaintiff suffer personal injury

Comments are closed.