Grazilda Odisho v Marcia Bonazzi

[2014] HCASL 196

GRAZILDA ODISHO

v

MARCIA BONAZZI

[2014] HCASL 196
M20/2014

1. The applicant developed pulmonary emboli after she had taken medication prescribed by the respondent, a specialist gynaecologist.  The applicant alleged that the medication caused the emboli, that the respondent should have warned her of the risk and that, had she been warned, she would not have taken the medication.

2. In the County Court of Victoria, the trial judge (Judge Saccardo) held that the applicant had not established that the respondent should have warned her of the slight risk that the medication could cause an embolus.  The trial judge found that, had a warning been given, the applicant would still have taken the medication.  The trial judge also found that the applicant had not established that the use of the medication did cause the emboli she developed.  The trial judge entered judgment for the respondent.

3. The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria.  That Court (Nettle and Beach JJA and McMillan AJA) dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge was correct in holding that the applicant had not shown that taking the medication was a cause of her developing pulmonary emboli.

4. The applicant now seeks special leave to appeal to this Court.

5. The applicant would enjoy insufficient prospects of success in disturbing the concurrent findings of the trial judge and the Court of Appeal that she had not shown that taking the medication was a cause of her developing pulmonary emboli to warrant a grant of special leave.

6. Pursuant to r 41.11.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

K.M. Hayne
15 October 2014 S.M. Crennan