J.M.M and Another v Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Health Gauteng Provincial Government (9253/2017) [2021] ZAGPPHC 654 (10 September 2021)

J.M.M and Another v Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Health Gauteng Provincial Government (9253/2017) [2021] ZAGPPHC 654 (10 September 2021)

The court found that while there was non-compliance with the Maternal Guidelines, the plaintiffs failed to prove that such non-compliance constituted negligence or that it caused the cerebral palsy suffered by the baby. The majority of experts agreed that the cause of the deprivation of blood and oxygen to the foetus was unknown. The court held that the plaintiffs did not discharge the onus to prove either negligence or causation. Furthermore, the available interventions were not feasible due to circumstances beyond the control of the medical staff, and there was no evidence that any act or omission by the defendant’s employees contributed to the severity of the injury. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2021] ZAGPPHC 654
Parties
Plaintiff: J.M.M; Plaintiff: M.M.M; Defendant: Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Health Gauteng Provincial Government
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 September 2021
Case Number
9253/2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Liability Trial (quantum Separated)
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claims dismissed.
Judges
M. Mbongwe
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Causation, Maternal Guidelines, Cerebral Palsy, Burden of Proof
Delict Civil Procedure Family and Children Medical Negligence Causation Maternal Guidelines Cerebral Palsy Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J.M.M

Plaintiff

M.M.M

Plaintiff

Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Health Gauteng Provincial Government

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Liability Trial (quantum Separated)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's medical staff were negligent in managing the plaintiff's labour and monitoring the foetal heartbeat rate.
  2. 2 Whether any such negligence caused the cerebral palsy condition of the plaintiff's baby.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while there was non-compliance with the Maternal Guidelines, the plaintiffs failed to prove that such non-compliance constituted negligence or that it caused the cerebral palsy suffered by the baby. The majority of experts agreed that the cause of the deprivation of blood and oxygen to the foetus was unknown. The court held that the plaintiffs did not discharge the onus to prove either negligence or causation. Furthermore, the available interventions were not feasible due to circumstances beyond the control of the medical staff, and there was no evidence that any act or omission by the defendant’s employees contributed to the severity of the injury. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claims dismissed.

Orders

  • The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.