Pearson v Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District

[2022] NSWSC 288

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Pearson v Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District [2022] NSWSC 288
Hearing dates:	9 March 2022
Date of orders:	9 March 2022
Decision date:	09 March 2022
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Walton J
Decision:	Settlement approved
Catchwords:	CIVIL PROCEDURE – application for settlement approval on behalf of infant - approval of settlement under s 76 of the Civil Procedure Act
Legislation Cited:	Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Robert Pearson (Plaintiff) Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District (First Defendant) Western Sydney Local Health District (Second Defendant) Dr Ronald Chin (Third Defendant) Dr Peter Flynn (Fourth Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: R Sheldon SC K Boyd Solicitors: Brydens Lawyers (Plaintiff) Makinson d’Apice Lawyers (First, Second, Third and Fourth Defendants)
File Number(s):	2018/164495

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: The Court has before it an application for approval of a settlement pursuant to s 76 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) with respect to an action brought by LF an 8 year old girl, soon to turn 9 years of age.

2. The principal proceedings are brought by her tutor, Robert Pearson, who is her grandfather, and the settlement proceeds upon the same basis. The parties have agreed to a consent judgment which they ask that the Court make in the circumstances of their settlement.

3. This matter has some unusual features, not the least of which is that all of the evidence in the proceedings for various reasons has been marked confidential. That confidential material involves, amongst other things, a detailed advice of senior counsel provided to the plaintiffs regarding the settlement of the matter.

4. It is sufficient to note that, in the primary claim, damages were sought as a result of the death of Olympia Pearson on 25 May 2015. Ms Pearson passed away at the age of 56. The various plaintiffs are in various familial relations with Ms Pearson. The respective actions have a common source of liability in an action for negligence.

5. In avoidance of any breach of the confidential evidence before the Court, I will simply note, for present purposes, that I have closely examined the advice and accompanying material, including medical reports, and have formed the view that the approval is appropriate having regard to some significant complexities associated with Ms Pearson’s medical condition and an issue of law in relation to an action for domestic support, or more particularly loss of expectation of domestic support, after the death of Ms Pearson.

6. In my view, the combination of all those factors results in a conclusion that the settlement reached is, in all the circumstances, reasonable and appropriate for approval under s 76 of the Civil Procedure Act. In the result, I approve the settlement which is expressed, in terms, in a proposed consent judgment. I make orders in accordance with the consent judgment.

**********

Decision last updated: 17 March 2022