Abstract
The availability of compensation for loss of chance in clinical negligence cases appeared to be available in Australia for a time, even after the conclusion reached by the House of Lords in Gregg v Scott. However, the issue only recently came for consideration by Australia's highest appellate court, which in Tabet v Gett adopted an approach more closely aligned with the majority in Greg v Scott. Unlike the factual background to Gregg v Scott, in Tabet v Gett the patient's physical condition had already crystallized. For that reason, the Australian decision may be of interest to readers in the United Kingdom as some commentators have suggested that a factual scenario similar to that in the Australian case may have given rise to a different outcome.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.