Sheppard v Swan

The court was asked to consider whether a doctor owed a duty of care to a patient to inform them of an alternative procedure during treatment. The case involved a patient who underwent a surgical procedure and subsequently suffered complications. The patient alleged that the doctor had failed to inform them of an alternative procedure that was available and could have resulted in better outcomes. The High Court of Australia was the forum for this appeal.

The legal issues before the court were whether a doctor had a duty to inform a patient of an alternative procedure during treatment, the role of expert opinion in determining such a duty, the adequacy of reasons given by the lower courts, and whether there was a reasonable apprehension of bias in the proceedings. The court was required to consider the principles of negligence and the standard of care owed by a doctor to their patient.

The court held that a doctor may owe a duty to inform a patient of an alternative procedure during treatment, depending on the circumstances. The court found that expert opinion was necessary to determine whether such a duty existed, and that the lower courts had not given adequate reasons for their decisions. The court also found that there was no reasonable apprehension of bias in the proceedings. The appeal was ultimately dismissed.

No further orders were made by the court. The decision provides guidance for doctors on the potential duty to inform patients of alternative procedures during treatment, and the importance of providing adequate reasons for decisions in legal proceedings.