Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Brachial plexus injury

Legal area

Court

3 Oct 2024

XXXX 1. ) Darul Aiman Sdn Bhd 2. ) Dr Wan Ratna Iza binti Wan Abdul Rahim

Citation

B-02(NCvC)(W)-2095-11/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

B-02(NCvC)(W)-2095-11/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal found the High Court plainly wrong on primary facts: contemporaneous records and expert evidence supported that shoulder dystocia occurred and that excessive traction during vacuum extraction caused the appellant's permanent brachial plexus injury; R2 breached the duty of care and R1 is vicariously liable for R2's negligence; R1's claim for contribution/indemnity from R2 was dismissed on policy grounds; the quantum for future damages was revised accordingly.
12 Nov 2021

Mohd Sidik Bin Muhamad Ketar 1. ) Zainal Hazril Bin Zainal Mokthar 2. ) Zainal Mokthar Bin Zainal Abidin

Citation

AB-12BNCvC-2-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-12BNCvC-2-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On appeal the court found plaintiff proved on balance of probabilities a permanent total right brachial plexus injury caused by the accident and that the specialised motorised MyoPro2 orthosis was necessary and useful; SP3's expert evidence was admissible under s45 Evidence Act and, given his specific expertise and corroborating medical evidence, outweighed SD1's contrary opinion; thus the claim for the orthosis (RM3,977,160) and costs (RM7,000) were allowed and the defendants' cross-appeal dismissed.