Supreme Court of New South Wales

Stephen Taylor v Ian Woodgate

2025/00127431

Date Party Submission
27/6/2025 Appellant Notice of Appeal (PDF, 274.8 KB)
31/8/2025 Appellant Submissions (PDF, 919.5 KB)
29/9/2025 Respondent Submissions (PDF, 1.5 MB)
7/10/2025 Appellant Submissions in Reply (PDF, 154.5 KB)

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE (medical) – the appellant, Mr Stephen Taylor, has had a history of hip problems since childhood – at 14 years, he was diagnosed with a slipped upper femoral epiphysis and in 1984 underwent surgery – the respondent, Dr Ian Woodgate, is an orthopaedic surgeon – Mr Taylor first consulted Dr Woodgate on 24 August 2010, complaining of left hip pain – Mr Taylor had multiple left hip surgeries from 2010 to 2019, including replacements and revisions by Dr Woodgate – Mr Taylor sued the respondent for negligence, alleging that Dr Woodgate was negligent in respect to his: preoperative advice, surgical technique, and, the subsequent post-operative management – the primary judge held that Mr Taylor’s case against Dr Woodgate failed – issues on appeal: whether the primary judge erred in overlooking or rejecting radiological expert evidence as to what imaging obtained during the period from August 2011 to 2017 showed as to loosening or movement in the appellant's femoral stem – whether the primary judge erred in finding that there was no loosening or movement in the appellant's femoral stem from August 2011 to 2017 – whether the primary judge erred in finding that Dr Woodgate discharged his duty of care to Mr Taylor, when checking the femoral stem for loosening during the revision procedure on 30 August 2011 – whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant would not have achieved a materially better outcome even if a conventional femoral stem had been implanted during the revision procedure on 30 August 2011 – whether the primary judge erred in finding that Dr Woodgate discharged his duty of care to Mr Taylor in consultations between the revision procedure on 30 August 2011 and prior to the last consultation on 28 March 2019, despite the respondent in each consultation between that period not detecting, investigating or recommending revision surgery to treat signs of loosening or movement in the femoral stem – whether the primary judge erred in finding that Mr Taylor would not have achieved a materially better outcome even if a conventional femoral stem had been implanted during the period from 30 August 2011 until 27 May 2019.

Last updated: