Alrifai v ACT

The appeal in *Alrifai v ACT* concerned an allegation of medical negligence against a hospital, brought by the appellant. The primary dispute revolved around the alleged delayed diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. While the hospital admitted a failure to exercise reasonable care and skill, specifically in the treating clinicians’ failure to obtain a surgical opinion at a particular point in time, all other allegations of negligence were rejected by the primary judge. The central question on appeal was whether the primary judge erred in declining to find that the admitted breach of duty caused the injuries alleged by the appellant.

The court was required to determine whether the admitted failure to obtain a surgical opinion constituted a causative breach of the duty of care owed to the appellant, and if so, whether that breach caused the appellant's alleged injuries. This involved an assessment of the causal link between the admitted negligence and the progression of the appellant's medical condition.

The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the primary judge's decision. The reasoning focused on the lack of a sufficient causal connection between the admitted breach and the appellant's alleged harm. The court found that even if a surgical opinion had been obtained earlier, it would not have altered the outcome or the appellant's injuries. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.