Abstract
Clinical liability arises when medical practitioner fails to fulfil the duty of care owed to the patient with clinical performance not meeting the reasonable standard. This chapter will start with an introduction to discuss how duty of care arise to be considered as reasonable and foreseeable with authorities from Australia, England, Hong Kong, New Zealand, and how definition of standard of medical care has evolved from Bolam to Montgomery. Under what circumstances will medical practitioner owed duty of care to third party? The discussion will take reference from a case of infectious disease and a case of psychiatric injuries drawing authorities from common law jurisdictions. What standard should we impose on general practitioner in conducting special medical assessment? The standard should also take into account for disclosing clinical information to address the material risk of that particular patient as reflected by a case of assessment of commercial diver.KeywordsDuty of careStandard of careProximityReasonableFairJustidiableForeseeableDisclosure of informationMaterial risk
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
