Authored by Deniro Pillay
In May 2026, the High Court found that a doctor was not liable for the alleged negligence of a locum doctor who attended to a patient at the doctor’s private practice.
The patient alleged that the doctor who treated her at the private practice was negligent in a prescribing medication to terminate her pregnancy, which medication caused an irreparable uterine tear. As a result of the tear, the patient allegedly had a subtotal hysterectomy and, as a consequence, she can no longer have children.
The doctor’s defence was that the patient was treated at his private practice by a locum doctor. The locum doctor was not employed by him, but attended to patients as an independent medical practitioner for his own benefit. The doctor provided documentary evidence in support of his defence, such as the patient file and the patient’s medical certificate, which were completed by the locum doctor. The doctor did not attend to nor examine the patient, or prescribe any medication for her. It was the first time the patient had visited the practice. The patient claimed it was the doctor who treated her, not the locum doctor, but this was refuted by the evidence.
The court upheld the doctor’s defence and decided that it would be unreasonable to impose liability on him in the circumstances. The doctor owed no legal duty to avoid injury or harm to the patient. The court noted that the patient did not plead a case of vicarious liability against the doctor for the alleged negligence of the locum doctor.
B.Z.Y v Mduna (2361/2018) [2026] ZAECMHC 32 (26 May 2026)