Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in personal injuries medical negligence proceedings, determines issue of liability alone and finds the defendant liable for the significant neurological damage caused to the plaintiff by a condition diagnosed as hydrocephalus, arising from and attributable to numerous professional failures on the part of a public health nurse to record and detail certain medical matters on two crucial check up dates following the birth.
Personal injuries - medical negligence - question of liability - plaintiff's serious neurological symptoms attributable to hydrocephalus - whether caused or materially contributed to by reason of the negligence of a servant or agent of defendant - whether a failure to detect hydrocephalus prior to it causing neurological damage - congenital disability since birth - balance of probabilities - whether public health nurse ought to have been alerted as to the possibility of a developing situation and taken appropriate action - history of treatment - note taking and recording of post-natal examinations below expected standard of care - incorrect measurement of plaintiff's head circumference - whether a failure to carefully monitor a breach of duty of care - mother's concerns not recorded - whether sufficient evidence to establish plaintiff's claims - development post birth - growth charts - legal duty of care - general negligence test - standard appropriate to medical professional - delay in diagnosis from absence of growth chart - failure to record mother's concerns amongst other medical matters determinative - defendant liable in respect of two out of three alleged dates.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.