DR HARI KRISHNAN & ANOR v. MEGAT NOOR ISHAK MEGAT IBRAHIM & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL

[2018] 1 MLRA 535
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Raus Sharif CJ, Ahmad Maarop CJM, Zainun Ali, A Samah Nordin, Ramly Ali FFCJ
[Civil Appeal Nos: 02-21-03-2015(W) & 02-26-04-2015(W)]
Raus Sharif CJ, Ahmad Maarop CJM, Zainun Ali, A Samah Nordin, Ramly Ali FFCJ

Professions : Medical practitioners - Negligence - Standard of care - Test to be applied - Negligence of ophthalmologist - Standard of care expected in respect of either diagnosis or treatment - Whether it was the Bolam test or the test in Rogers v. Whitaker which should be applied to the standard of care in medical negligence

Tort : Negligence - Medical negligence - Claim against medical doctors and private hospital for tortuous conduct or clinical negligence of former - Medical doctors practising at private hospital as an independent contractor - Whether doctrine of nondelegable duty of care applied to the hospital

Tort : Negligence - Medical Negligence - Vicarious Liability - Doctors working as independent contractors by virtue of a contract between private hospital and doctors - Whether private hospital could be held vicariously liable for sole negligence of doctors - Whether criteria for imposing vicarious liability satisfied

Tort : Damages - Aggravating factors - Whether aggravating factors should be compensated for as general damages - Whether there should be separate award of aggravated damages

Civil Procedure : Preliminary Issue - Judgment - Grounds of judgment - Trial judge delivered non-speaking judgment - Whether judgment had sufficient coverage of material facts to enable one to determine legal issues - Whether a retrial should be ordered pursuant to s 100 Courts of Judicature Act 1964 - Grounds on which a new trial might be granted

Civil Procedure : Preliminary Issue - Court of Appeal - Validity of judgment of Court of Appeal - Unanimous judgment pronounced in open court by three full serving judges but subsequently only one judge delivered written grounds of judgment - Whether judgment of Court of Appeal fell foul of ss 38 and 42 Courts of Judicature Act 1964 as well as r 64 of Rules of the Federal Court 1995 - Whether null and void - Whether grievous miscarriage of justice had been occasioned - Whether a retrial of the appeal by another panel of Court of Appeal could be ordered pursuant to s 100 Courts of Judicature Act 1964

Sign up to view full cases Login