UCPR 229 - defamation proceedings – damages to be assessed – application to interrogate as to defendant’s motive - implications of Defamation ACT 2005 - application to interrogate before action - when in the interests of justice

In Hogan v Ellery [2009] QDC 154 McGill DCJ considered two applications for leave to deliver interrogatories under r 229 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). The judgment provides useful analysis of the circumstances in which a plaintiff may obtain leave to deliver interrogatories to a defendant in defamation proceedings, and also to a non-party before action.

Effectiveness of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine against radiologically diagnosed pneumonia in indigenous infants in Australia

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) in preventing pneumonia, diagnosed radiologically according to World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, among indigenous infants in the Northern Territory of Australia. Methods We conducted a historical cohort study of consecutive indigenous birth cohorts between 1 April 1998 and 28 February 2005. Children were followed up to 18 months of age. The PCV7 programme commenced on 1 June 2001. All chest X-rays taken within 3 days of any hospitalization were assessed. The primary endpoint was a first episode of WHO-defined pneumonia requiring hospitalization. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare disease incidence. Findings There were 526 pneumonia events among 10 600 children - an incidence of 3.3 per 1000 child-months; 183 episodes (34.8%) occurred before 5 months of age and 247 (47.0%) by 7 months. Of the children studied, 27% had received 3 doses of vaccine by 7 months of age. Hazard ratios for endpoint pneumonia were 1.01 for 1 versus 0 doses; 1.03 for 2 versus 0 doses; and 0.84 for 3 versus 0 doses. Conclusion There was limited evidence that PCV7 reduced the incidence of radiologically confirmed pneumonia among Northern Territory indigenous infants, although there was a non-significant trend towards an effect after receipt of the third dose. These findings might be explained by lack of timely vaccination and/or occurrence of disease at an early age. Additionally, the relative contribution of vaccine-type pneumococcus to severe pneumonia in a setting where multiple other pathogens are prevalent may differ with respect to other settings where vaccine efficacy has been clearly established.

Practice & procedure : Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002

The decision of Atkinson J in Watkins v State of Queensland [2007] QSC 057 on an application for disclosure of documents under s27 of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) required determination of a range of issues relating to the disclosure of documents and legal professional privilege.

Disclosure obligations - Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002

In Huag v Jupiters Limited [2007] QSC 068, Lyons J considered the extent of the obligations imposed upon a respondent under the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 to disclose documents and information.

Practice & procedure : disclosure obligations - Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 s27

In Huag v Jupiters Limited [2007] QCA 199 the Queensland Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from interlocutory orders made in the trial division of the court and concluded that, although provisions such as s27 of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld) should be given a broad, remedial construction, this did not mean the words of limitation in the section could be ignored.

Practice and Procedure - Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 - whether "urgent need" under s43 to start proceeding notwithstanding non-compliance with chapter 2 part 1

In Lamb v State of Queensland [2003] QDC 003 McGill DCJ considered an application under s43 of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002. That provision permits the court to give a claimant leave to start a proceeding notwithstanding non-compliance with part 1 of chapter two of the Act, "if the court is satisfied there is an urgent need to start the proceeding."

Practice and procedure : Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 s56

In Amos v Brisbane City Council [2005] QCA 433 the Queensland Court of Appeal was called upon to determine the scope of s56 of the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002. The decision makes it clear that the section does not provide a complete code governing awards of damages and does not deprive the court of power to award costs against a plaintiff who fails to succeed on liability.