P v MEC for Health Provincial Government of the Free State (4014/2014) [2018] ZAFSHC 153 (12 October 2018)

P v MEC for Health Provincial Government of the Free State (4014/2014) [2018] ZAFSHC 153 (12 October 2018)

The court found that although the defendant was negligent in administering Cytotec to the plaintiff contrary to standard protocol and without proper monitoring, the evidence did not establish that this negligence caused the death of the foetus. The expert testimony, including that of the defendant's own witness, confirmed the presence of severe chorioamnionitis and bronchial pneumonia, which were the actual causes of death. There was no evidence of uterine hyper stimulation, and the plaintiff's expert conceded that his theory was conjectural. The court further found that there was no factual basis to conclude that earlier delivery or caesarean section would have prevented the death, as...

Citation
[2018] ZAFSHC 153
Parties
Plaintiff: C P; Defendant: MEC for Health Provincial Government of the Free State
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 October 2018
Case Number
4014/2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Postponed
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.
Judges
Phalatsi
Legal Topics
Medical Negligence, Causation, Stillbirth, Expert Evidence, Hospital Protocols
Delict Civil Procedure Family and Children Medical Negligence Causation Stillbirth Expert Evidence Hospital Protocols

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C P

Plaintiff

MEC for Health Provincial Government of the Free State

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Merits Only; Quantum Postponed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was negligent in the administration of Cytotec during the plaintiff's labour.
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's negligence caused the intra-uterine death and stillbirth of the plaintiff's baby.
  3. 3 Whether earlier delivery or caesarean section would have prevented the foetal death.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although the defendant was negligent in administering Cytotec to the plaintiff contrary to standard protocol and without proper monitoring, the evidence did not establish that this negligence caused the death of the foetus. The expert testimony, including that of the defendant's own witness, confirmed the presence of severe chorioamnionitis and bronchial pneumonia, which were the actual causes of death. There was no evidence of uterine hyper stimulation, and the plaintiff's expert conceded that his theory was conjectural. The court further found that there was no factual basis to conclude that earlier delivery or caesarean section would have prevented the death, as...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

Orders

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