McKinnon, Grant v Commonwealth of Australia

McKinnon and the Commonwealth of Australia came before the court in a matter concerning the applicant's request for a medical examination. The applicant, McKinnon, had requested a medical examination in relation to the proceedings. However, the respondents, the Commonwealth of Australia, sought orders for the examination to be conducted in Sydney and not adjacent to a dental surgery. The court was required to determine whether McKinnon's request for the medical examination was reasonable and whether the respondents' conditions for the examination were appropriate.

The court found that McKinnon's request for a medical examination was reasonable, but the respondents' conditions for the examination were not appropriate. The court held that McKinnon was entitled to have the examination conducted by a medical practitioner of his choice, but the location and timing of the examination were subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the respondents. The court found that the respondents' conditions for the examination were unreasonable because they imposed an undue burden on McKinnon and were not necessary to protect the respondents' interests. The court also found that the respondents' condition that the examination not be conducted adjacent to a dental surgery was not reasonable because it did not serve any legitimate purpose.

As a result, the court made orders that the respondents notify McKinnon of the appointments that have been made for medical examinations for him in Sydney on or before seven days from today, those appointments not being adjacent to a dental surgery. In the event that McKinnon does not participate in those examinations, leave was granted to the respondents to have the motions relisted on 48 hours notice so that the proceedings may be stayed against the respondent or respondents whose expert medical appointments are not kept. McKinnon was also ordered to pay the costs of the respondents’ motions.