← All Authorities
Australia professional negligenceduty of care

Rosenberg v Percival

(2001) 205 CLR 434
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2001
StatusBinding authority

Summary

In medical negligence, the materiality of risk for informed consent purposes must be assessed by reference to the patient's particular circumstances, elaborating Rogers v Whitaker.

Key Principle

Medical negligence and informed consent; materiality of risk depends on patient's particular circumstances; elaboration of Rogers v Whitaker principles

Area of Law

tort

Related Cases

Bird v DP (A Pseudonym) (2024) 98 ALJR 486

High Court of Australia held a religious organisation vicariously liable for sexual abuse by a priest, recognising a relationship akin to employment sufficient to ground vicarious liability.

Bryant v Badenoch Integrated Logging Pty Ltd (2023) 278 CLR 99

High Court of Australia held that the peak indebtedness rule does not apply when assessing unfair preferences under s 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).

Kozarov v Victoria (2022) 275 CLR 115

An employer owes a duty to take reasonable steps to protect an employee from psychiatric injury caused by vicarious trauma, and may breach that duty by failing to act on obvious warning signs.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Rosenberg v Percival and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Rosenberg v Percival