Blum v Weiers

In *Blum v Weiers*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an appeal concerning damages awarded by a jury against a doctor for medical negligence. The dispute arose from a claim for successive wrongs, where an initial work injury was followed by alleged medical negligence in its treatment. The jury had found the doctor liable for substantial general damages and economic loss.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable, specifically in relation to the extent to which the medical negligence had significantly increased the plaintiff's loss, and whether the plaintiff's earning capacity had been effectively destroyed by the original work injury, thereby diminishing the impact of the subsequent negligence.

The Court of Appeal held that the jury's verdict was unreasonable. Applying principles of causation and the assessment of damages for successive torts, the court reasoned that the evidence did not sufficiently support the jury's finding that the medical negligence had caused a significant increase in the plaintiff's loss beyond that attributable to the initial work injury. The court concluded that the jury's assessment of damages was not open on the evidence presented.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal ordered that the verdict and judgment against the appellant doctor be set aside and that there be a new trial limited to the assessment of damages between the first respondent (the plaintiff) and the appellant. The first respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal.