Carney v Newton: expert evidence about the standard of clinical notes.

Thomas Faunce*, Ingrid Hammer, Susannah Jefferys

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In Carney v Newton [2006] TASSC 4 the Tasmanian Supreme Court heard a claim that the defendant breached his duty of care by failing to properly diagnose and treat a node positive carcinoma in the plaintiff's breast tissue. At trial, argument turned on the actual dialogue that took place during the initial consultation, with significant reliance on the clinical notes of the defendant. The court gave considerable weight to "expert" witnesses in ascertaining the acceptability of the defendant's conduct concerning the maintenance and interpretation of his clinical notes. This raises important questions in relation to proof of quality of medical records as part of the current professional standard of care, as modified by recent legislation in most jurisdictions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)360-365
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of law and medicine
Volume15
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2007

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Carney v Newton: expert evidence about the standard of clinical notes.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this