Miller v Jones (No. 6)

In the case of Miller v Jones (No. 6), the plaintiff, a professional rugby league player, brought an action against the defendant, an orthopaedic surgeon, alleging negligence in the course of surgery to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in the plaintiff's right knee. The plaintiff contended that the defendant's malpositioning of the graft during the surgery caused him to suffer ongoing disabilities, ultimately preventing him from continuing his career as a professional rugby league player. The Supreme Court of New South Wales was tasked with determining the issues of duty of care, causation, and damages, as well as the applicable law.

The court was required to ascertain whether the defendant breached the standard of care expected of a reasonably competent orthopaedic surgeon and whether this breach caused the plaintiff's ongoing disabilities and his loss of career opportunity. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether an infection contributed to the plaintiff's disabilities and the extent to which the plaintiff's non-financial losses and lost career opportunities were recoverable under French law, as the incident occurred in France. Finally, the court had to consider the application of French law to the issues of duty of care and damages due to the cross-border nature of the dispute.

The court found that the defendant breached his duty of care by malpositioning the graft, which led to the plaintiff's ongoing disabilities. The court also determined that the breach of duty caused the plaintiff to lose his opportunity to pursue a career as a professional rugby league player. While an infection did contribute to the plaintiff's disabilities, the court held that the defendant's negligence was the primary cause. As for damages, the court applied French law, which allowed for recovery of non-financial losses and lost career opportunities. The court also held that the plaintiff could recover damages for the lost opportunity to pursue a career in the mining industry, as this opportunity was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the surgery.

The court ordered the defendant to compensate the plaintiff for his non-financial losses and lost career opportunities, as determined under French law. The court also directed that the defendant pay damages for the plaintiff's lost opportunity to pursue a career in the mining industry. The precise amount of damages was to be determined in accordance with the law of France.