A woman in South Africa had sued Dr. Sam Amaoukua Adu for damages arising from medical complications she experienced after giving birth in December 2019. The North West High Court in Mahikeng dismissed her R6 million claim, finding that she failed to institute her claim within the prescribed three-year period. Acting Judge B.F. Mnyovu upheld Dr. Adu's special plea of prescription and dismissed the woman's claim with costs.
The woman claimed that she suffered complications after giving birth to her child on December 11, 2019, including the passage of flatus and faecal matter through her vagina. She alleged that the complications resulted from a breach of the doctor's duty of care and negligence in the medical treatment and procedures provided to her. Her claim included damages for multiple surgical procedures and medical treatment, loss of amenities of life, as well as emotional and psychological problems.
The doctor testified that he had treated the woman since 2017 and had provided her with antenatal care. He said that after she gave birth, he examined her and advised her to return to hospital for a six-week check-up. The woman attended the hospital in January 2020, and according to the doctor, there were no complications at that stage. However, she later began experiencing problems in February 2020.
The woman disputed parts of the doctor's evidence and said she had first consulted him in November 2020, when he diagnosed her with an infection and referred her for surgery. After the operation, she continued experiencing the same problem and was referred to Dr. Van Wyk, whom she consulted on February 24, 2021. She later sought legal advice and was referred to Dr. Burgin for an assessment of the cause of her condition.
The woman argued that she only acquired the necessary knowledge to pursue a medical negligence claim after receiving Dr. Burgin's report in June 2021. However, the court found that she had acquired the relevant primary facts through her consultations and medical treatment before she obtained Dr. Burgin's report. The court distinguished between the primary facts underlying a claim and the legal conclusion that those facts amounted to negligence.
The court applied the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, which provides for a three-year prescription period applicable to the claim. The judge found that knowledge of a legal conclusion such as negligence was not required before prescription could begin. The court found that the woman knew Dr. Adu's identity and the primary facts underlying her claim by February 2021.
The court consequently found that the claim expired on February 3, 2024, and upheld Dr. Adu's special plea of prescription, dismissing the woman's claim. She was also ordered to pay the costs of the application. The judgment explained that in professional negligence cases, a mere suspicion that something had gone wrong does not necessarily immediately trigger prescription.
Key points
- The North West High Court in Mahikeng dismissed a woman's R6 million medical negligence claim against a doctor due to a three-year delay in instituting the claim.
- The woman had sued Dr. Sam Amaoukua Adu for damages arising from medical complications she experienced after giving birth in December 2019.
- The court applied the Prescription Act 68 of 1969, which provides for a three-year prescription period applicable to the claim.
