1.0 IntroductionThe tort of negligence is designed to protect citizens of society from personal injury caused by the negligent action of someone else. The negligence reform adopted from the “Ipp Report” in 2003 went too far in trying to reduce the number of negligence claims against professionals. Thanks to these 2003 reforms, citizens who have a legitimate right to compensation are now less likely to hold a professional responsible for the damage caused. The reforms, which now make up the current law, must be reformed again to balance litigation in favor of no one and ensure fair and just results in court. The law in question is the Civil Liability Act 2003. Section 22 of this law focuses on the standard of care for professionals. This is the section most in need of reform, due to its excessive protection of professionals from liability.2.0 Medicine and the Law of Negligence2.1 History of Negligence and MedicineOne of the The first principles used in this area of ​​law was the Bolam Principle. In the words of Justice McNair, in his charge to the jury: "[a physician] is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of physicians competent in that particular art..." Conversely, a man is not negligent if he acts in accordance with such a practice, simply because there is a body of opinion to the contrary. Many believed that this principle adopted in the House of Lords applied in Australia. However, in Rogers v Whitaker (1992), the six judges of the High Court concluded that the Bolam principle was not the only one to decide whether the standard...... middle of paper... ... own peer support, everything will be decided by a body which will determine whether they had peer support/met the standard of care outlined in section 22. This will ensure that the decision on the standard of care is fair, as is the case for a group of experts in the field.4.0 ConclusionIn summary, the reforms suggested by Justice Ipp in 2002 went too far in reducing personal injury claims. The 3rd recommendation of the report largely protected professionals, particularly those in the medical field. The reforms discussed should be introduced in order to move the rest of the litigation away from the defendant and should give citizens of society more chances to claim their damages caused by professionals. These changes reflect the current needs of society and would have legal support across Australia if they continued..