Ingrid Nunnink

Partner

Qualifications

Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Victoria and High Court of Australia
Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court New Zealand
Bachelor of Laws
Bachelor of Science
Master of Laws (Medical and Health Law)

Principal Areas of Practice

Alternative Dispute Resolution
Commercial Litigation
Insurance Law and Litigation

Professional Memberships

Member Medico – Legal Society of Victoria
Law Institute of Victoria

Professional Biography

Ingrid has practised in insurance litigation since 2001. She has extensive experience in civil litigation across all Victorian Courts, in some Interstate Courts and Federal jurisdictions. Ingrid’s principal practice is in personal injury litigation and Coronial inquests, representing organisations across a range of industries and sectors as well as medical and allied health professionals. Other areas in which Ingrid has been involved include religious, disability and sex discrimination, allegations of historical abuse, aged care services, representation of individuals before professional registration boards and judicial review and administrative law.

Ingrid has acquired a sound knowledge of insurance matters including policy construction and has familiarity with liability, D&O, and professional indemnity policies as well as recovery proceedings.

Some of the matters Ingrid works on raise sensitive issues or have a public or media interest. Ingrid is used to dealing with these broader issues and assisting clients manage reputational risks while maintain professional relationships and contracts.

Representative matters:

Represented an organisation and a number of its staff at a 28 day Inquest in the Coroners Court of Victoria which involved 7 interested parties including stakeholders.
Successfully defended numerous applications for judicial review in the Supreme Court for review of decisions concerning the exercise of statutory powers of an appointed office holder.
Represented a medical professional in a significant medical negligence case and succeeded with pre-trial applications in both the Supreme and Federal Courts to challenge the claim in contribution proceedings as invalidly commenced.