The court established that damages in medical negligence cases should be assessed based on reasonableness rather than rigid rules, especially concerning future medical expenses.

[1] The appellant in appeals M-01(IM)-273-08-2015 and M-01(IM)-274-08- 2015 was the 3rd plaintiff in an action filed on 3 September 2009, originally in the Sessions Court. The 3rd plaintiff together with her parents (the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs) had sued for damages premised on a cause of action in medical negligence which allegedly had occurred during her birth on 19 November 2006 at the Malacca Hospital. It was claimed that in consequence thereof the 3rd plaintiff presently suffers from cerebral palsy.

[2] The defendants who were cited in that action were the appellants now before us in M-01(M)-275-08-2015. The 1st and 2nd defendants were the Medical Officers attending to the case. The 3rd defendant was sued on the grounds that they were vicariously liable as owners of the Malacca Hospital for the alleged negligence.

[3] The action that had been filed in the Sessions Court was subsequently transferred to the High Court on 28 January 2011.

[4] On 7 March 2013, the parties entered a Consent Judgment in the suit whereby the defendants admitted to liability, with the issue of damages remitted to the learned Deputy Registrar of the Court for assessment.

[5] At the hearing of the assessment of damages, the parties adduced evidence through witnesses. On 23 October 2014, the learned Deputy Registrar delivered an award of damages in favour of the 3rd plaintiff in the total sum of RM6,934,129.30. (The plaintiff 's total claim was for some RM9,291,904.20, while the defendants were only agreeable to concede to a sum of RM2,009,009.40 thereto).

[6] Both parties being dissatisfied with the award of the learned Deputy Registrar filed respective appeals against that decision (Lampiran 31 and Lampiran 34B) to the Judge-in-Chambers.

[7] The learned judge dealt with both appeals together and in a decision delivered on 30 June 2015 revised downwards the sum awarded to the 1st plaintiff to a total sum of RM4,859,322.76.

[8] The 3rd plaintiff and the defendants have respectively now appealed to us as per the appeal proceedings referred to in paras 1 and 2 above against the learned judge's decision.

[9] For convenience, the parties will be referred to herein as they appeared in the suit, namely as the plaintiff and the defendants.

'Summary Of Decision'

[10] We heard the appeals together on 1 April 2016 and after taking time to consider the respective submissions of the counsel, we delivered our decision on 6 May 2016. On that day, we handed to the counsel a 'Summary of Decision', a copy of which is attached to this Grounds as ANNEXURE-A.

[11] There were four categories under which damages had been awarded. They were:

(a) Special Damages - loss or expenses incurred before the filing of the suit (35 months);

(b) Pre-Trial Damages - loss or expenses incurred between the filing of the suit (30 September 2009) and the date of assessment by the learned Deputy Registrar (23 October 2014). That is, for 61 months;

(c) Future Damages; and

(d) Pain and Suffering/General Damages.

[12] We will in this grounds of decision make reference to ANNEXURE-A to place in proper perspective the categories and the subheads of claim under each of those categories (where applicable) to facilitate in capturing:

(a) what were the respective awards made by the learned Deputy Registrar and whether such amount allowed had been subsequently varied by the learned judge;

(b) whether an appeal had b