The judicial review of Magistrate Graveney Bannister’s decision in his Coroner’s Inquest into the death of Warren Mottley has been adjourned until next month.
When it resumes, Magistrate Bannister is expected to face cross-examination from the legal team representing Dr Sahle Griffith.
It was on December 23, last year, that Magistrate Bannister found that the conduct of the two doctors who treated Mottley amounted to a criminal act.
In addition he determined there was “gross” negligence exhibited by Griffith and anaesthesiologist Dr Nigel Farnum in Mottley’s care and that junior doctors could not be blamed.
“Warren Mottley went into Surgical Solutions for a routine colonoscopy, a routine procedure but he did not come out. That should not have happened if due care had been used,” the Coroner declared.
“Having reviewed the evidence before this inquest, in my view it was a failure to diagnose or misdiagnose; a failure to treat the infection or shock. It was breach of duty which gave rise to an obvious and serious risk of death. The conduct was egregious; an egregious failure to exhibit the minimum standard of care on Warren Mottley or it was a gross dereliction of care,” the Coroner held.
However, Griffith’s legal team of Senior Counsel Ralph Thorne, Senior Counsel Hal Gollop and attorney Emerald Griffith, have
filed a motion for judicial review, asking the High Court to find that the coroner acted in a manner that was contrary to law; that he exceeded his jurisdiction; that he breached the principles of natural justice; that he acted unreasonably in the exercise of his discretion; that he acted upon irrelevant considerations; that he acted in breach of the Coroner’s Act; that he acted in the absence of evidence on which his finding could reasonably be based; and that he gave a verdict that exceeded his powers. (HLE)