Medical negligence occurs when there is no due care
A medical doctor may be held liable for medical negligence when he is not possessed with the qualification or skill or when he fails to exercise reasonable skill which he processes in giving treatment, says the Supreme Court ( SC) in Neeraj Sud & Another v Jaswinder Singh ( Minor) & Another [2024 INSC 825].
Deterioration of patient’s condition may not indicate negligence
A medical negligence case is a case in which the patient has not received reasonable care expected of the medical professional. Deterioration of the condition of the patient post-surgery is not necessarily indicative of the fact that the surgery performed or treatment given to the patient was not proper or there was some negligence in administering it.
Simply because the patient has not responded favourable to the surgery or treatment or the surgery has failed, the doctor cannot be held liable for medical negligence unless it is established by evidence that the doctor failed to exercise the due skill in discharging his duties.
Bolam’s case lays down a popular test
In a celebrated and very often cited decision in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (Queen’s Bench Division), it was observed that a doctor is not negligent if he is acting in accordance with the acceptable norms of practice unless there is evidence of a medical body of skilled persons in the field opining that the accepted principles/procedure were not followed.
The test so laid down popularly came to be known as Bolam’s test and stands approved by the SC in Jacob Mathews v. State of Punjab and Another [AIR 2005 SC 3180].
Reference
