Morocz v Marshman

The appellant, Morocz, brought proceedings against the respondent, Marshman, alleging medical negligence. The dispute concerned whether the respondent, a medical practitioner, had adequately warned the appellant of the material risks associated with a particular surgical procedure. The case was heard on appeal in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the warnings provided by the respondent regarding the risks of the procedure were adequate, and specifically, whether certain identified risks were "material" such that they ought to have been disclosed to the appellant. The court also considered applications to lead fresh evidence on appeal and the admissibility of expert evidence under section 79 of the Uniform Evidence Law.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's applications to lead fresh evidence and affirmed the trial judge's findings. The court applied the established legal principles regarding a medical practitioner's duty to warn a patient of material risks, which includes risks that a reasonable person in the patient's position would likely attach significance to in deciding whether to undergo the proposed treatment. The court found that the warnings given were sufficient and that the risks in question were not material in the circumstances.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal on a party-party basis.