Netherwood v Hillier

The plaintiff, Netherwood, commenced proceedings against the first defendant, a neurosurgeon, and the second and third defendants, orthopaedic surgeons, for professional negligence following a spinal fusion surgery. The third defendant was a fourth-year orthopaedic registrar at the time of the surgery. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff claimed that the surgery resulted in significant injury and that the defendants had failed to provide the appropriate standard of care and skill.

The court had to determine whether the third defendant, as a fourth-year orthopaedic registrar, owed a duty of care to the plaintiff and, if so, whether that duty was breached. The court also had to consider whether there was expert evidence that the standard of care and skill required of a medical practitioner in the third defendant's position was not met. Finally, the court had to consider whether the third defendant was properly joined as a party to the proceeding, given the absence of an expert opinion on the standard of care and skill required of a medical practitioner in his position.

The court found that the third defendant did owe a duty of care to the plaintiff but that there was no expert opinion that the surgery was performed with less than the requisite standard of care and skill. The court held that the third defendant was not properly joined as a party to the proceeding, as there was no evidence to suggest that he was negligent. The court found that the third defendant's non-compliance with rule 31.36 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules resulted in the dismissal of the claim against him. The court dismissed the claim against the third defendant and ordered the plaintiff to pay the third defendant's costs.