Doctor Does not Always Know Best  

Oleh:

Fordham, Margaret

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Singapore Journal of Legal Studies (Jul. 2007), page 128-137.
Topik: medical; doctor; medical practitioner

Ketersediaan

Perpustakaan Pusat (Semanggi) Nomor Panggil: SS46 Non-tandon: 1 (dapat dipinjam: 0) Tandon: tidak ada

Lihat Detail Induk

Isi artikel

In determining whether a medical practitioner has acted negligently, courts may choose between two basic approaches. The first, articulated in the English case of Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee, 1 effectively requires a court to be guided by the standards of the medical profession. The second, laid down in the Australian decision of Rogers v. Whitaker 2 allows a court - while taking account of the relevant medical evidence - to decide for itself whether or not the defendant doctor has been negligent. The Bolam test (subject to the qualifications imposed by the decision in Bolitho v. City & Hackney Health Authority 3) is still generally applied - at least in the area of negligent treatment - in England, and the Singapore Court of Appeal confirmed in Dr. Khoo James v. Gunapathy 4 that it is similarly favoured in Singapore. However, in recent years a number of Malaysian decisions have followed the Australian approach, and now in Foo Fio Na v. Dr Soo Fook Mun5 the Federal Court has rejected Bolam, apparently adopting Rogers as the applicable test for assessing all forms of medical negligence.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali