M N v Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government (2016/07322) [2017] ZAGPJHC 465 (29 September 2017)

M N v Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government (2016/07322) [2017] ZAGPJHC 465 (29 September 2017)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving negligence on the part of the defendant's medical staff. The complication suffered by the plaintiff, namely hoarseness of voice due to stretching of the laryngeal nerve, was a known risk of the procedure and did not, in itself, establish negligence. The evidence of the defendant's witnesses was accepted as reliable and unchallenged, and the plaintiff did not call her own experts to support her case. The court held that the plaintiff set an unreasonably high standard for surgeons and that the applicable standard is that of a reasonably competent practitioner. The arguments regarding contraventions of the National...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPJHC 465
Parties
Plaintiff: M N; Defendant: Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 2017
Case Number
2016/07322
Procedural Posture
Delictual Action / Merits Only
Outcome
Plaintiff's action dismissed with costs.
Judges
Windell
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Informed Consent, Vicarious Liability, Standard of Care, Bodily Integrity, Patient Rights
Delict Civil Procedure Family and Children Medical Negligence Informed Consent Vicarious Liability Standard of Care Bodily Integrity +1 more

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M N

Plaintiff

Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Delictual Action / Merits Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's medical staff were negligent during the parathyroidectomy procedure performed on the plaintiff.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant failed to obtain the plaintiff's informed consent prior to surgery.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff suffered harm as a result of the alleged negligence or lack of informed consent.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving negligence on the part of the defendant's medical staff. The complication suffered by the plaintiff, namely hoarseness of voice due to stretching of the laryngeal nerve, was a known risk of the procedure and did not, in itself, establish negligence. The evidence of the defendant's witnesses was accepted as reliable and unchallenged, and the plaintiff did not call her own experts to support her case. The court held that the plaintiff set an unreasonably high standard for surgeons and that the applicable standard is that of a reasonably competent practitioner. The arguments regarding contraventions of the National...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's action dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's action against the defendant is dismissed with costs.