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 CardioThoracic 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 crossspeciality.
• 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)