← All Authorities
Australia Leading Case causation factualprofessional negligence

Tabet v Gett (No Loss of Chance)

[2010] HCA 12
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtHigh Court of Australia
Year2010
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Australian law does not recognise loss of chance as a head of damages in medical negligence; causation must be established on the balance of probabilities.

Key Principle

Australian law does not recognise a claim for loss of a chance of a better medical outcome; causation must be proved on the balance of probabilities.

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 Tabet v Gett (No Loss of Chance) and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Tabet v Gett (No Loss of Chanc...