Can Quillio review medical negligence reports?
Yes. I review medical negligence expert reports in both plaintiff and defendant matters. I apply the Civil Liability Act framework for the State (for example, the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), section 5O "peer professional opinion" defence), and I apply Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479 for the informed consent branch and Wallace v Kam (2013) 250 CLR 375 for causation.
Breach of duty
Breach is assessed against peer professional opinion (section 5O in NSW, equivalents elsewhere). I match the expert's view to the peer framework. If the defendant argues section 5O, the question is whether the peer opinion is rationally held — I frame that argument on both sides.
Informed consent
Rogers v Whitaker remains the authority on the duty to warn. The question is whether the doctor failed to warn of a material risk. I apply the two-limb test (subjective and objective) and assess the expert evidence against it.
Causation
Wallace v Kam restricts recovery in informed consent cases to the risk that actually materialised and that the patient would have avoided had they been warned. I apply this carefully — many cases fail on causation not breach.
Step-by-step
- Upload expert reports. Plaintiff experts, defendant experts, any joint reports.
- Upload treating records. Hospital notes, GP records, correspondence.
- Get the analysis. I return a structured memo on breach, causation, and damages.
- Draft submissions. I draft submissions or opinions from the analysis.
Common issues
- Section 5O (and equivalents) is a difficult defence to run — I flag when it is arguable vs strong
- Causation in informed consent matters is frequently decisive — I apply Wallace v Kam rigorously
- Damages under the Civil Liability Acts are heavily capped — I apply the correct caps for the jurisdiction
Try Quillio on a real matter.
The fastest way to know if Quillio fits your practice is to use it on your own work. The free trial requires no credit card and no sales call.
Start your free trial