Todd v South Eastern Sydney Local Health District ABN 70442041439

In this case, the family of Todd, a patient suffering from sepsis, sought a mandatory interlocutory injunction to compel the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District to administer a medical regime for the treatment of sepsis as requested by the family. The dispute centred on whether the hospital was obligated to implement the family's requested treatment, given the hospital's professional medical opinion that alternative treatments were more appropriate. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the hospital had a duty to follow the family's medical directives when those directives were in conflict with the hospital's professional medical opinion. The court had to weigh the rights of the patient and their family against the hospital's duty of care and professional medical judgment. The court also had to consider the balance of convenience and whether an injunction would be appropriate in the circumstances.

The court found that while the family's request was understandable, the hospital had a duty to provide care based on professional medical judgment. The court concluded that the hospital's decision to treat the patient with alternative measures was in accordance with accepted medical practice and did not constitute a breach of duty. Consequently, the court denied the family's request for a mandatory interlocutory injunction. However, the court left the door open for the family to seek orders to transfer the patient to another facility if they so desired.