R B v Smith (211/2018) [2019] ZASCA 48; 2020 (4) SA 51 (SCA) (1 April 2019)

R B v Smith (211/2018) [2019] ZASCA 48; 2020 (4) SA 51 (SCA) (1 April 2019)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that Dr Smith provided Mrs B with sufficient information regarding both laparoscopic and open hernia repair procedures, including the material risks and benefits of each. The evidence, including medical records and expert testimony, supported the conclusion that Mrs B was informed of her options and gave valid consent. The court held that the standard of care was met and that there was no negligence in the obtaining of informed consent or in the performance of the surgery. The factual findings of the trial court were confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] ZASCA 48
Parties
Appellant: R B; Respondent: Dr Samuel Johannes Smith
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 April 2019
Case Number
211/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Navsa, Zondi, Dambuza, Mocumie, Mokgohloa
Legal Topics
Informed Consent, Medical Negligence, Damages, Standard of Care
Delict Civil Procedure Informed Consent Medical Negligence Damages Standard of Care

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R B

Appellant

Dr Samuel Johannes Smith

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Gauteng Division, Pretoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Smith failed to obtain informed consent from Mrs B prior to performing laparoscopic hernia repair.
  2. 2 Whether the information provided to Mrs B was sufficient to enable her to make an informed decision regarding the surgical procedure.
  3. 3 Whether Dr Smith was negligent in his choice and performance of the surgical procedure.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that Dr Smith provided Mrs B with sufficient information regarding both laparoscopic and open hernia repair procedures, including the material risks and benefits of each. The evidence, including medical records and expert testimony, supported the conclusion that Mrs B was informed of her options and gave valid consent. The court held that the standard of care was met and that there was no negligence in the obtaining of informed consent or in the performance of the surgery. The factual findings of the trial court were confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.