McDONALD v IRUNGU

In the matter of McDonald v Irungu, the case was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The plaintiff, McDonald, sought judicial review of a decision made by a medical panel, which was established under the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic). McDonald contended that the panel failed to make a determination within the stipulated 30-day period as required by s 28LZG(3) of the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic). The defendant, Irungu, was the head of the medical panel. The primary issue before the court was whether the panel's failure to make a timely determination warranted setting aside the decision and whether costs should be awarded against Irungu, given his passive role in the proceedings.

The court found that the medical panel's failure to comply with the statutory timeframe was a valid ground for judicial review. Consequently, the determination made by the panel was set aside. Regarding the costs, the court exercised its discretion under Order 56 of the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic), deciding that it was not appropriate to order costs against the medical panel. However, the court held Irungu accountable for the costs due to his passive role in the proceedings. Furthermore, the court granted an indemnity certificate under s 4 of the Appeal Costs Act 1998 (Vic), ensuring that Irungu would be protected from any potential financial loss should he lose an appeal against the costs order.

The final orders of the court included setting aside the medical panel's determination, absolving the panel from any costs, and directing Irungu to pay the costs of the proceeding. Additionally, an indemnity certificate was granted to Irungu, providing him with protection in the event of an appeal. This decision highlights the importance of timely decision-making by medical panels and the court's discretion in allocating costs when one party adopts a passive role in the proceedings.