In August 2025, the High Court awarded R2 million in general damages to a child who was left permanently blind in both eyes due to the negligent administration of oxygen after his premature birth at a public hospital.
The child was born breech and suffered respiratory distress syndrome. As a result, the child sustained brain damage and related co-morbidities. Following the birth, the child received treatment at the hospital, which included the administration of oxygen. As a result of the oxygen treatment, which was administered negligently by the defendant’s employees, the child developed retinopathy of prematurity, resulting in permanent blindness in both eyes.
The defendant conceded liability to pay 100% of the child’s damages only in respect of the permanent blindness in both eyes. The court had to determine the award of general damages to the child.
The claimant argued that the child should be awarded R2 million on the submission that blindness from birth denies the child any visual memory or independence. The denial of sight to compromised premature babies ensures that a difficult life is made exponentially worse.
The defendant argued that the award should be R1.5 million on the submission that this case is different from other cases as the child has brain damage. The court did not have expert reports to evaluate apportionment of the child’s brain damage and eye damage. The defendant submitted that the purpose of the compensation regime is not to punish the defendants, but to award fair compensation to a claimant.
The court disagreed with the defendant’s submission that because the child also suffered from unrelated brain damage and co-morbidities, compensation should be reduced to R1.5 million. It reaffirmed that a court must consider all relevant factors, a just compensation for pain and suffering, disfigurement, permanent disability, and loss of amenities. This is the discretionary function of the court in assessment of a just and fair compensation to be awarded to a claimant.
After considering the expert evidence and comparable case law, the court decided that blindness compounded the child’s existing disabilities and made him completely dependent on others, impairing the quality of his life. The court awarded the child R2 million in general damages.
This judgment illustrates how the law of general damages is context-sensitive. For conscious claimants, even with severe co-morbidities, our courts emphasise the need to fairly reflect the compounded impact of negligence on quality of life.