Tuesday, November 24, 2009

NUS in 2 new negligence lawsuits

The National University Hospital (NUH) after settling the issue of compensation in one negligence case, has now been hit with 2 new negligence lawsuits.

In the first case, the patient Derrick Peh was completely paralysed after surgery on his shoulder in 2006. He suffered a cardio-pulmonary collapse during the operation. He later died of pneumonia this year, some 3 years after the alleged negligence by NUS. It is likely that since the death took place quite a while after the surgery, issues of causation would be prominent in the case. His family would have to prove that the alleged negligence led to his death. In medical circles, it is well-known that immobility especially in elderly patients, often leads to death from respiratory diseases.

In the second case, the patient, who requested that her name not be mentioned (although her name can be found by any lawyer who is willing to pay for a court search), is suing for alleged mistakes in her cancer treatment. It is claimed that a needle was inserted into her heart and instead of her liver. This later resulted in her undergoing open heart surgery, as a result of which, she is unable to work. This writer expects that her claim would be for any permanent impairment in her lifestyle as well as for loss of income.

In both the above cases, the families are seeking $500,000 as damages.

NUH kidney transplant suit - appeal dropped

After losing a lawsuit in relation to a kidney transplant gone wrong which caused the death of Madam Narindar Kaur , National University Hospital (NUH) has dropped the appeal against the decision. The High Court decision in July this year had found 2 doctors not negligent but found the hospital guilty of negligence. However, the issue of damages was to be assessed later. This can be quite a tedious process as lawyers and the court estimate the life expectancy of the deceased and how much income the deceased person would have earned in the future, and this may also be painful for the family.

NUS had settled the issue of damages on confidential terms with Madam Kaur's family. It is likely that in return for the certainty of compensation and quick payment, they accepted less than what the court might have otherwise ordered. An appeal to the Court of Appeal from the High Court decision and the actual assessment of damages might have added 6 to 12 months to the date when payment of damages (if any) would have been made to the family.