Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 26 NOVEMBER 2025

Market Intelligence Thought Leadership Award Winner

Sufficient Knowledge, Not Suspicion: Clarifying Prescription In Medical Malpractice Cases

Adams & Adams
Adams & Adams
Contributor
Adams & Adams

Adams & Adams

Who we are: Established in 1908, Adams & Adams is an internationally recognised and leading African...

View firm profile
Explore more from Adams & Adams

The recent Eastern Cape Division of the High Court judgment in N[…] v Member of the Executive for the Department of Health, Eastern Cape serves as a critical reminder of the intricacies...

South AfricaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Introduction:

The recent Eastern Cape Division of the High Court judgment in N[...] v Member of the Executive for the Department of Health, Eastern Cape serves as a critical reminder of the intricacies surrounding prescription in medical malpractice claims, particularly where the claimant is a layperson with limited access to medical knowledge. The judgment further delves into how courts interpret "knowledge of the facts" under section 12(3) of the Prescription Act and section 3 of the Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act.

Summary of facts:

The plaintiff alleged negligence by medical staff at St Lucy's Hospital during the birth of her child on 23 January 2007. The child suffered severe hypoxic ischemic brain injury, resulting in permanent disability. The plaintiff claimed that the hospital failed to monitor labour adequately and provide reasonable care.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from