The Australian litigation landscape - Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and general dentistry (oral surgery procedures): An analysis of litigation cases

Background: There are persistent concerns about litigation in the dental and medical professions. These concerns arise in a setting where general dentists are more frequently undertaking a wider range of oral surgery procedures, potentially increasing legal risk. Methods: Judicial cases dealing with medical negligence in the fields of general dentistry (oral surgery procedure) and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery were located using the three main legal databases. Relevant cases were analysed to determine the procedures involved, the patients’ claims of injury, findings of negligence, and damages awarded. A thematic analysis of the cases was undertaken to determine trends. Results: Fifteen cases over a twenty-year period were located across almost all Australian jurisdictions (eight cases involved general dentists; seven cases involved Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons). Eleven of the fifteen cases involved determinations of whether or not the practitioner had failed in their duty of care; negligence was found in six cases. Eleven of the fifteen cases related to molar extractions (eight specifically to third molar). Conclusions: Dental and medical practitioners wanting to manage legal risk should have regard to circumstances arising in judicial cases. Adequate warning of risks is critical, as is offering referral in appropriate cases. Pre-operative radiographs, good medical records, and processes to ensure appropriate follow-up are also important.

Introduction: Epitope mimicry as a component cause of autoimmune disease

The causes of autoimmune diseases have yet to be fully elucidated. Autoantibodies, autoreactive T cell responses, the presence of a predisposing major histocompatibility complex (MHC) haplotype and responsiveness to corticosteroids are features, and some are possibly contributory causes of autoimmune disease. The most challenging question is how autoimmune diseases are triggered. Molecular mimicry of host cell determinants by epitopes of infectious agents with ensuing cross-reactivity is one of the most popular yet still controversial theories for the initiation of autoimmune diseases [1]. Throughout the 1990s, hundreds of research articles focusing to various extents on epitope mimicry, as it is more accurately described in an immunological context, were published annually. Many of these articles presented data that were consistent with the hypothesis of mimicry but that did not actually prove the theory. Other equally convincing reports indicated that epitope mimicry was not the cause of the autoimmune disease despite sequence similarity between molecules of infectious agents and the host. Some 20 years ago, Rothman [2] proposed a model for disease causation and I have used this as a framework to examine the role of epitope mimicry in the development of autoimmune disease. The thesis of Rothman’s model is that an effect, in this instance autoimmune disease, arises as a result of a cause. In most cases, multiple-component causes contribute synergistically to yield the effect, and each of these components alone is insufficient as a cause. Logically, some component causes, such as the presence of a particular autoimmune response, are also necessary causes.

Legal duties following the discharge of mental health patients

In the recent decision of Hunter and New England Local Health District v McKenna; Hunter and New England Local Health District v Simon, the High Court of Australia held that a hospital and its medical staff owed no common law duty of care to third parties claiming for mental harm, against the background of statutory powers to detain mentally ill patients. This conclusion was based in part on the statutory framework and in part on the inconsistency which would arise if such a duty was imposed. If such a duty was imposed in these circumstances, the consequence may be that doctors would generally detain rather than discharge mentally ill persons to avoid the foreseeable risk of harm to others. Such an approach would be inconsistent with the policy of the mental health legislation , which favours personal liberty and discharge rather than detention unless no other care of a less restrictive kind is appropriate and reasonably available.

Sexual harassment: A threat to gradual women emancipation

This article is an attempt to highlight gender-based attitude of society towards women. Women comprise approximately 50% of the total population of Pakistan; Pakistan cannot afford to keep half of its citizens inactive and their potential as participants in development and progress untapped. Nothing more than the misogynist view of women as weak in physical power and deficient in mental faculties has marred the upward movement of societies. Women who defy this erroneous obscurantist conceptualisation and step into public domain are forced either to step back or to make compromises with the situation at the cost of their self-esteem and dignity. This deviant social behaviour is identified as sexual harassment of women. Sexual harassment of women exists beyond geographic spaces, across historic times, and today is prevalent in all societies, developed or underdeveloped. Women are sexually harassed within the safe havens of their homes too. This paper examines how a combination of factors, including religious interpretations, social norms, state negligence, and bad governance result in creating and than perpetuating an anti-women environment that breeds sexual harassment and solidifies patriarchal structures. The last section of this paper cites reported cases of sexual harassment at workplace that happened between 2001 and 2011. Summing up, the paper offers some suggestions to minimise work-place sexual harassment of women.

Liability and statutory defence in Queensland

Context Increasing client awareness of valuer's duty of care - Webb Resolutions Ltd v E.Surv Ltd [2012] - Provident Capital Limited v John Virtue Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] - Including disciplinary actions: Valuers Registration Board of Qld v Conroy [2013] QCAT 688 combined with Post-GFC ‘drops’ in value!

Questions about multidisciplinary teams

Multidisciplinary care (MDC) involves health professionals from a range of disciplines working together as a team (a multidisciplinary team – MDT) to deliver comprehensive care that addresses as many of a patient's needs as possible. Writing in 2011, Wilcoxon and others concluded: ‘Multidisciplinary care is accepted as best practice in cancer treatment planning and care.’ Yet their report (of the national audit of multidisciplinary cancer care in Australia) indicated that two-thirds of the surveyed hospitals did not have a MDT. Further, they found that where teams did exist, one-third of patients were not told that their case would be discussed by the team; the MDT-recommended treatment plan was not included in the patient’s record one-quarter of the time; and less than 1 per cent of teams reported routine attendance by the tumour-specific minimum core team. There is sparse case authority as to the potential medico-legal consequences of MDC by MDTs. This article raises five questions about legal aspects of MDC for consideration. The questions are not limited to cancer care, as MDTs are increasingly used in other areas of medicine.

Strategically Pleading Intentional Torts in medical cases

The opportunities and challenges faced by litigants who strategically plead intentional torts are borne out by two recent medical cases. Both arose out of dental treatment. Dean v Phung established some key principles which were clarified in White v Johnston. Before considering those two cases it is worth examining the environment in which such intentional torts claims now exist. Following the Ipp Review of the Law of Negligence, non-uniform legislative changes to the law of negligence were introduced across Australia which have imposed limitations on liability and quantum of damages in cases where a person has been injured through the fault of another. While it seems that, given the limitation of the scope of the review and recommendations to negligently caused damage, the Ipp Review reforms were meant to be limited to injury resulting from negligent acts rather than intentional torts, the extent to which the civil liability legislation applies to intentional torts differs across Australia.

The Statutory Defence(s) of 'peer professional opinion'

In the wake of the GFC and with ever increasing consumer-protection-related laws, clients are more aware of their rights and your obligations as a professional valuer. They also are more likely to take legal action if, as a result of their reliance on a valuation, they suffer a financial loss. In some Australian jurisdictions, in response to a claim of negligence, the professional valuer may be able to raise a professional practice defence under civil liability legislation. This article considers the nature of this statutory defence, what is required to rely upon it and in which jurisdictions it applies.

Human and pathogen factors associated with chlamydia trachomatis-related infertility in women

Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted pathogen worldwide. Infection can result in serious reproductive pathologies, including pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy, and infertility, in women. However, the processes that result in these reproductive pathologies have not been well defined. Here we review the evidence for the human disease burden of these chlamydial reproductive pathologies. We then review human-based evidence that links Chlamydia with reproductive pathologies in women. We present data supporting the idea that host, immunological, epidemiological, and pathogen factors may all contribute to the development of infertility. Specifically, we review the existing evidence that host and pathogen genotypes, host hormone status, age of sexual debut, sexual behavior, coinfections, and repeat infections are all likely to be contributory factors in development of infertility. Pathogen factors such as infectious burden, treatment failure, and tissue tropisms or ascension capacity are also potential contributory factors. We present four possible processes of pathology development and how these processes are supported by the published data. We highlight the limitations of the evidence and propose future studies that could improve our understanding of how chlamydial infertility in women occurs and possible future interventions to reduce this disease burden.

Predictive technology and natural hazards: Risk for Australian planning authorities?

Purpose The object of this paper is to examine whether the improvements in technology that enhance community understanding of the frequency and severity of natural hazards also increased the risk of potential liability of planning authorities in negligence. In Australia, the National Strategy imposes a resilience based approach to disaster management and stresses that responsible land use planning can reduce or prevent the impact of natural hazards upon communities. Design/methodology/approach This paper analyses how the principles of negligence allocate responsibility for loss suffered by a landowner in a hazard prone area between the landowner and local government. Findings The analysis in this paper concludes that despite being able to establish a causal link between the loss suffered by a landowner and the approval of a local authority to build in a hazard prone area, it would be in the rarest of circumstances a negligence action may be proven. Research limitations/implications The focus of this paper is on planning policies and land development, not on the negligent provision of advice or information by the local authority. Practical implications This paper identifies the issues a landowner may face when seeking compensation from a local authority for loss suffered due to the occurrence of a natural hazard known or predicted to be possible in the area. Originality/value The paper establishes that as risk managers, local authorities must place reliance upon scientific modelling and predictive technology when determining planning processes in order to fulfil their responsibilities under the National Strategy and to limit any possible liability in negligence.

After the rains: Water’s impact for valuation practices

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to reduce the potential for litigation by improving valuers’ awareness of water risks. As part of a valuer’s due diligence, the paper provides guidance as to how to identify such risks by explaining the different types and examining how online search tools can be used in conjunction with more traditional methods to evaluate the probability of these risks occurring. Design/methodology/approach The paper builds on prior research, which examined the impact of water to and for valuations. By means of legal/doctrinal analysis, this paper considers relevant issues from the perspective of managing client expectations and needs. In so doing it identifies online tools available to assist in identifying at risk properties and better informing clients. Findings While the internet provides a variety of tools to gain access to relevant information, this information most commonly is only provided subject to disclaimer. Valuers need to ensure that blind reliance is not given to use of these tools but that the tools are used in conjunction with individual property inspections. Research limitations/implications Although the examples considered primarily are Australian, increasing water risks generally make the issues considered relevant for any jurisdiction. The research will be of particular interests to practitioners in coastal or riverine areas. Practical implications Valuation reports are sought for a variety of purposes from a variety of clients. These range from the experienced, knowledgeable developer looking to maximise available equity to the inexperienced, uneducated individual looking to acquire their home and thinking more often than not with their heart not their head. More informed practices by valuers will lead to valuation reports being more easily understood by clients, thus lessening the likelihood of litigation against the valuer for negligence. Originality/value The paper highlights the issue of water risks; the need for valuers to properly address potential and actual risks in their reports; and the corresponding need to undertake all appropriate searches and enquiries of the property to be valued. It reinforces the importance of access to the internet as a tool in the valuation process.

Governance of enterprise Information and Technology: A new core competency for boards of directors

With the level of digital disruption that is affecting businesses around the globe, you might expect high levels of Governance of Enterprise Information and Technology (GEIT) capability within boards. Boards and their senior executives know technology is important. More than 90% of boards and senior executives currently identify technology as essential to their current businesses, and to their organization’s future. But as few as 16% have sufficient GEIT capability. Global Centre for Digital Business Transformation’s recent research contains strong indicators of the need for change. Despite board awareness of both the likelihood and impact of digital disruption, things digital are still not viewed as a board-level matter in 45% of companies. And, it’s not just the board. The lack of board attention to technology can be mirrored at senior executive level as well. When asked about their organization’s attitude towards digital disruption, 43% of executives said their business either did not recognise it as a priority or was not responding appropriately. A further 32% were taking a “follower” approach, a potentially risky move as we will explain. Given all the evidence that boards know information and technology (I&T***) is vital, that they understand the inevitably, impact and speed of digital change and disruption, why are so many boards dragging their heels? Ignoring I&T disruption and refusing to build capability at board level is nothing short of negligence. Too many boards risk flying blind without GEIT capability [2]. To help build decision quality and I&T governance capability, this research: • Confirms a pressing need to build individual competency and cumulative, across-board capability in governing I&T • Identifies six factors that have rapidly increased the need, risk and urgency • Finds that boards may risk not meeting their duty of care responsibilities when it comes to I&T oversight • Highlights barriers to building capability details three GEIT competencies that boards and executives can use for evaluation, selection, recruitment and professional development.