In a January 2025 judgment, the High Court addressed a claim for delictual damages by the claimant, who alleged that she suffered harm due to the negligence of the employees, nurses, and doctors at a District Hospital. The claimant contended that the defendant, the MEC for Health, Limpopo Provincial Government, failed to provide adequate monitoring and timely intervention during her labour, resulting in the stillbirth of her baby. The court had to determine whether the defendant breached its duty of care by failing to provide adequate monitoring and timely intervention, and whether this failure caused the tragic outcome. The court held that the defendant’s negligence in monitoring and responding to the claimant’s condition was a significant factor that led to the stillbirth, thus constituting professional negligence.
The claimant, a 21-year-old woman with a history of a previous caesarean section (C-section) in 2014, was admitted to the District Hospital on 18 October 2018 due to lower abdominal pain and anaemia. Given her high-risk status, she was monitored daily until 25 October 2018, when she was transferred to the labour ward after experiencing labour pains. However, from that point, she was not adequately monitored until the following day. On 26 October 2018, at around 06:00 am, the claimant felt a sudden severe abdominal pain, indicative of a possible uterine rupture. Despite her cries for help, no medical staff attended to her. She had to rely on another patient to assist her to the nursing station, where she was told to return to sleep without being examined. It was only later in the morning, when the nurses noticed her shivering and shortness of breath, that doctors were called, and an emergency C-section was performed. Unfortunately, the baby was delivered stillborn due to the ruptured uterus.
The primary legal issues in this case were whether the defendant was negligent in failing to provide adequate monitoring and timely intervention, and whether this failure caused the stillbirth.
The claimant’s expert, an obstetrician and gynaecologist, argued that the management of the claimant’s condition was substandard, and that better monitoring and timely intervention could have prevented the stillbirth. The defendant’s expert, also an obstetrician and gynaecologist, contended that the uterine rupture was a sentinel event that could not have been predicted or prevented by the hospital staff.
The court found that the defendant was negligent in not providing adequate monitoring and timely intervention. The evidence showed that the claimant, being a high-risk patient with a history of C-section and anaemia, required close monitoring and prompt medical attention. The court noted that the medical staff’s failure to respond to the claimant’s cries for help and the delay in performing the emergency C-section were significant factors that led to the stillbirth. The court concluded that if the medical staff had acted with reasonable care and attended to the claimant promptly, the tragic outcome could have been prevented.
The defendant was held liable for such damages as the plaintiff may prove to have arisen as a result of the negligent treatment and monitoring provided to her at the District Hospital on 26 October 2018, resulting in the stillbirth of her baby.