Legal Aspects of Healthcare: Landmark Judgments

SIU Auditorium, Symbiosis Lavale Campus

Name of the Speaker: Dr. Gopinath N. Shenoy

Designation: Medico-Legal Consultant

Topic: Legal Aspects of Healthcare: Landmark Judgements

SUMMARY • Dr. Gopinath N. Shenoy stated that Medical Negligence Law is

not a parliament made law but it is judges made law through various landmark judgments delivered and pronounced by constitutional codes.

• Dr. Shenoy first briefed about Bolam’s rule as described in one of the famous judgment delivered by UK court and same is followed in India and has become backbone.

• A patient with an psychiatric ailment went to a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist had two methods of treatment

• The methods were ECT with Muscle Relaxant and ECT without the Muscle Relaxant.

• The psychiatrist administered an ECT without a muscle relaxant. This lead to convulsions in the patient.

• The patient suffered a major fracture due to the convulsions. The patient sued the hospital

THE JUDGMENT

• According to Bolam’s law when management can be done in more than one ways and negligence occurs due to one theory then it cannot be considered negligence.

• Based on this law various judgments have been given.• Dr. Shenoy then briefed us about many examples of cases

pertaining to this Bolam’s Law.

2nd English Judgement

• Roe v/s English Judgment• A patient with an infected toe was given spinal anesthesia

which was given by the nurse.• The patient didn’t come out of spinal anesthesia and the

patient suffered permanent parapledgia. • The ampule of the instrument used had an opening.• Phenol had percolated in the ampule and hence patient could

not come out of the anesthesia. • This is the Forceability Law states that if a push is not

forceable , compensation is not administered.

• Dr. Shenoy gave an example of one of the best Indian Judgements.

• Jacob Matthew v/s State of Punjab• A patient suffering a terminal malignancy and Dr. Jacob

Matthew let the patient remain hospitalized.• Once the family realized that the patient started gasping they

alerted the nurse who brought a Oxygen Cylinder. Which was empty.

• A new Oxygen Cylinder was bought but by the time Jacob Matthews arrived the patient had died.

• The relatives registered an FIR against the hospital and the doctor in Criminal Court. The case further went to the Supreme Court.

• Justice Lahoti said that anything and everything that goes wrong by the medical practitioner, criminal machinery should not be moved.

• Dr. Gopinath Shenoy gave another example of an Indian Judgement

• Prashanta Didhanta v/s Nizam of Hyderabad • The patient had a chronic respiratory problem and the patient

was hospitalized in Nizam Hospital.• The patient was detected with a posterior Mediastinal Mass

and after going through an excision biopsy the general medicine department referred the patient to the Cardio-Thoracic department.

• In this department it was detected that the mass was attached to the Spinal Cord.

• While excising this mass the neurosurgeon was also called and the patient was operated under anesthesia.

• When he became conscious it was realized that the patient had suffered from permanent paraplegia of both the limbs.

• The case was filed against the hospital and the doctors in the Supreme Court.

• The verdict was given in favor of the patient giving him the compensation of 1 crore and the National Commission stated that cross-speciality was done in this case and which is against the Law. The doctors are not allowed to practice cross-speciality.

• Sir also said this above cross specialty law is exempted under 3 conditions

• He is a doctor of General Medicine• He is a doctor of Emergency Medicine • He is a doctor of General Surgery.• Conclusion • The Supreme Court has become liberal in giving

compensation as the Medical Laws against the doctors have become more strict than earlier.

Report Prepared By:

• Akhila Nayak

• Anisha Mehta

• Ebrahim Khan

• Nikhil Dhorepatil

• Shirin Khan

• Swati Sonik

• Yogita Patil

(MBA –HHM 2013-15)