The court reaffirmed that medical practitioners must adhere to the Bolam standard of care, and failure to act promptly can result in liability for negligence.

JUDGMENT

Abdul Wahab Mohamed J:

Introduction

[1] This is an action filed by the plaintiff, Ahmad Thaqif Amzar bin Ahmad Huzairi through his mother and legal representative Majdah binti Mohd Yusof (PW1) claiming that the plaintiff had suffered severe and irreversible brain damage as a result of the defendants' negligence conduct.

[2] The plaintiff had in the present case called the following witnesses:

(i) the mother and litigation representative of the plaintiff Puan Majdah binti Mohd Yusof (SP1);

(ii) the liability expert, consultant otorhinolaryngologist Professor Datuk Paduka Dr Balwant Singh Gendeh (SP2);

(iii) the quantum expert, consultant rehabilitation physician Dr Kavitha Uma Ratnalingam (SP3); and

(iv) the father of the plaintiff Encik Ahmad Huzairi bin Ali (SP4).

[3] The first and second defendants had called the following witnesses:

(i) the second defendant, Dr Zainal Rashid bin Abdullah (SD8 (D2)); and

(ii) his liability expert, emergency and trauma physician Dr Mahathar Abd Wahab (SD9 (D1)).

[4] The third to 12th defendants witnesses are as follows:

(i) the eighth defendant, Dr Khairuddin bin Ismail (SD1 (D8));

(ii) the fourth defendant, Dr Zaidatul Akmal binti Othman (SD2 (D4));

(iii) the sixth defendant, Dr Zul Akmar binti Zakaria (SD3 (D6));

(iv) the 11th defendant, Dr Rabiatul Aida binti Ramli (SD4 (D11));

(v) the tenth defendant, Dr Mastural binti Mohamed (SD5 (D10));

(vi) the 12th defendant, Dr Abdul Karim Othman (SD6 (D12));

(vii) the seventh defendant, Dr Ahmad Mardzuki bin Ibrahim (SD7 (D7));

(viii) the ninth defendant, Dr Nik Nabihah binti Nik Razin (SD11 (D9));

(ix) the fifth defendant, Dr Muhammad Fathil bin Karim alias Kasim (SD10 (D5));

(x) their liability expert, otorhinolaryngologist Dr Norzi binti Gazali (SD12); and

(xi) their quantum expert, rehabilitation physician Dr Rahimah binti Nawi (SD13).

Background Facts

[5] The plaintiff was suffering from a fever and a swelling on his neck and was brought to the first defendant's Hospital ("KTSH") and was treated by the second defendant on 30 August 2011, the second defendant had diagnosed the plaintiff with the following conditions:

(i) a fever of 39.8'C;

(ii) swollen cervical lymph node; and

(iii) lymphadenitis inflamed.

[6] Upon examination, the second defendant had prescribed the plaintiff with the following medicines:

(i) paracetemol syrup;

(ii) brufen syrup; and

(iii) unasyn syrup.

[7] On 1 Sptember 2011, the plaintiff's parents had brought him to KTSH for a second time ("second visit") and the plaintiff was again examined by the second defendant. Upon examination by the second defendant, it was discovered that the plaintiff's temperature had dropped to 37.8'C and that the cervical swelling had increased in size.

[8] The second defendant had advised for the plaintiff to be warded at KTSH to be referred to the paediatrician/ENT specialist, but the said admission was refused by the plaintiff's parents and the plaintiff was brought home instead.

[9] Five days later, PW1 had brought the plaintiff to Klinik Engku Shaikh where a referral letter was issued to refer the plaintiff to Hospital Sultanah Nur Zahirah ("HSNZ").

[10] The plaintiff's parents had on 5 September 2011 at 11.15pm brought the plaintiff to HSNZ where the plaintiff was attended by a medical officer at HSNZ at 12.49am.

[11] At about 1.47am on 6 September 2011, Thaqif was seen by the house officer Dr Zaidatul, the fourth defendant. She prescribed medications and noted that his pulse rate was 112 beats per minute.

[12] At about 8.52 am, the fourth defendant saw Thaqif again. The plan was for Thaqif to undergo an examination of the neck and an X-ray examination.

[13] At about 9.11am, Thaqif was seen by yet another house officer Dr Zul Akmar, the sixth defendant. She had incorrectly noted that Thaqif had "right neck swelling".

[14] At about 9.54am, Thaqif was seen by the sixth defendant and Dr Fathil, the fifth defendant. The X-ray investigation was undertaken and a plan was made to discuss Thaqif's case with a specialist. A CT s