Coulon v Adams
[2022] QDC 291 · Sheridan DCJ
Mary Coulon, a retired dressmaker who had a long history of physical and mental health problems, had a colonoscopy performed by Dr Felicity Adams in March 2018. The day after the procedure she became seriously unwell and was found to have a ruptured spleen, which then had to be surgically removed. Losing her spleen meant she would need lifelong antibiotics, and she said her physical and mental health declined afterwards. She sued Dr Adams for medical negligence, arguing the doctor must have used excessive force or manipulated the instrument incorrectly. The main contest was between two expert doctors: one said splenic injury only happens through poor technique, the other said it is a rare but recognised complication that can occur even with best-practice care. The court preferred the defendant's expert, found no evidence of negligence, and dismissed the claim. The judge still calculated what damages would have been (general damages of $14,400 and special damages of $5,250) in case of appeal, but Mrs Coulon recovered nothing.
Incident & injury
Splenic injury (ruptured subcapsular splenic haematoma) sustained during a colonoscopy performed by the defendant, requiring removal of the spleen (splenectomy)
- Body regions
- Internal organs, Spleen, Psychiatric
- Diagnoses
- Ruptured subcapsular splenic haematoma (post-splenectomy), Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood
- Incident date
- 7 March 2018
- Location
- Brisbane (private hospital)
Quick facts
- Date of judgment
- 19 December 2022
- Claim type
- PIPA Medical Negligence
- Proceeding
- Trial
- Plaintiff outcome
- Unsuccessful
- Plaintiff age at injury
- ~70 (inferred)
- Occupation
- Retired dressmaker (worked as dressmaker until 2015) Retired
- Liability
- Disputed
- ISV assessed
- 9 · Item 80 (loss of spleen with risk of ongoing internal infection)
- Total damages
- $0
Outcome
The claim was dismissed. The court found no evidence that Dr Adams was negligent in performing the colonoscopy; splenic injury was accepted as a rare but recognised complication that can occur without inappropriate manipulation or excessive force. The court preferred the defendant's expert evidence. Quantum was assessed contingently at general damages of $14,400 (ISV 9 under item 80) plus $5,250 special damages, but the plaintiff recovered nothing.
Defendant
1 Felicity Adams
Medical practitioner (gastroenterologist/endoscopist)
- Judgment against this defendant
- $0
Heads of damage
| General damages | $14,400 |
|---|---|
| Past special damages (plaintiff) | $4,050 |
| Future special damages | $1,200 |
Key issues
Coulon v Adams [2022] QDC 291
When typing in a Word document, italicise the case name. The copy button copies plain text suitable for any editor.