Cheminais v Crane (7078/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 183; [2025] 3 All SA 432 (WCC) (24 April 2025)

Cheminais v Crane (7078/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 183; [2025] 3 All SA 432 (WCC) (24 April 2025)

The court found that the defendant undertook to perform a minor procedure to remove a small osteophyte but instead performed a significantly more invasive surgery without clinical or radiological justification. The consent form was signed in blank and later completed without the plaintiff's knowledge, and the plaintiff was not properly informed of the true nature and risks of the procedure. Expert evidence established that the surgery was unjustified, excessively extensive, and fell below the standard of care expected of an orthopaedic surgeon. The court accepted that the defendant caused the fracture of the calcaneus and damage to the Achilles tendon during surgery, resulting in...

Citation
[2025] ZAWCHC 183
Parties
Plaintiff: Shane Cheminais; Defendant: Dr Jason Crane
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 April 2025
Case Number
7078/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated
Outcome
Plaintiff succeeds on the merits; defendant found liable for medical negligence and breach of contract.
Judges
W J Pretorius
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Standard of Care, Informed Consent, Breach of Contract, Expert Evidence
Delict Civil Procedure Medical Negligence Standard of Care Informed Consent Breach of Contract Expert Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shane Cheminais

Plaintiff

Dr Jason Crane

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Separated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the agreement by performing more extensive surgery than agreed upon.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant failed to exercise the necessary skill, care, and diligence expected of an orthopaedic surgeon.
  3. 3 Whether the defendant's conduct constituted medical negligence resulting in injury and permanent disability to the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant undertook to perform a minor procedure to remove a small osteophyte but instead performed a significantly more invasive surgery without clinical or radiological justification. The consent form was signed in blank and later completed without the plaintiff's knowledge, and the plaintiff was not properly informed of the true nature and risks of the procedure. Expert evidence established that the surgery was unjustified, excessively extensive, and fell below the standard of care expected of an orthopaedic surgeon. The court accepted that the defendant caused the fracture of the calcaneus and damage to the Achilles tendon during surgery, resulting in...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff succeeds on the merits; defendant found liable for medical negligence and breach of contract.

Orders

  • Defendant is liable for the plaintiff's costs of suit on a party and party scale, including senior counsel's fees at scale C.
  • Defendant is liable for the reasonable and necessary qualifying expenses of Dr G Versveld, orthopaedic surgeon.