Australian Business Law

Australian Business Law

Australian Business Law

Part A: Case Study

Answer 1

This case of Wallace vs. Kam is principally falls under Civil Law. It is quite clear one we look into the description of Criminal and Civil law. A dispute, which falls under personal injury, falls under the Civil Law. As in this case, Mr. Wallace got personally hurt due to the carelessness of Dr. Kam. Though it was the duly duty of doctor, in this case Dr. Kam, to inform the patient about the consequence of the treatment. However, due to carelessness or any other reason, he failed to tell Mr. Wallace about the after effects of the treatment, as a result he felt under neurapraxia. This situation falls under the attempt of personal injury, which principally falls under the Civil Law in regard to Australia Law (Kercher, B. 1995, pp. 13).

Answer 2

This case is principally between a doctor and his patient. Mr. Wallace was suffering from lumbar spine; he was under treatment to Dr. Kam, who was a neurosurgeon. Dr. Kam recommended him to undergo surgical procedure, which will help Wallace in curing his disorder. This procedure was though beneficial for Mr. Wallace, but might cause him neurapraxia and catastrophic paralysis. Unfortunately, Dr. Kam was unable to tell Mr. Wallace about the consequence of this treatment, and subsequent to the treatment; Mr. Wallace got sustaining neurapraxia. The material fact was that the doctor has failed to communicate his patient about the after effects of the treatment and thus, Mr. Wallace took this case in the Supreme Court.

The appeal of Mr. Wallace is rejected, as he claimed that he if he was told about the catastrophic paralysis, he would not undergo this surgery. However, the court assumed that if he were only warned about the neurapraxia, he would have undergone the surgery, and this is what happened to him after undergoing the surgery. Thus, his appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court.

Answer 3

This case principally falls under the area of Civil Law. As mentioned in the first question, the case is principally dependent upon the dispute of personal injury, which actually categories under the Civil Law. Moreover, the fact that is need to be proven is that the victim has got injured, which actually created various issues and problems in its daily life routine, and its unwillingness to get injured; whereas, in this case, Mr. Wallace himself presented his willingness for the side effect of neurapraxia. Thus, the court did not sue Dr. Kam. On the other hand, if he had claimed that if Dr. Kam would warn him about the neurapraxia, he would not undergone with the surgery. In this case, there would be a possibility that Dr. Kam got sued upon not warning Mr. Wallace for the consequences of the surgery (Kercher, B. 1995, pp. 19).

Answer 4

The court considers the section 5D (1) of the CLA. In this section the court review the two distinct elements of the ...