Case Law[2025] ZAGPJHC 610South Africa
K.M.V.W obo C.C.V.W v MEC for Health Gauteng Province (2018/21491) [2025] ZAGPJHC 610 (13 June 2025)
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2025
>>
[2025] ZAGPJHC 610
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## K.M.V.W obo C.C.V.W v MEC for Health Gauteng Province (2018/21491) [2025] ZAGPJHC 610 (13 June 2025)
K.M.V.W obo C.C.V.W v MEC for Health Gauteng Province (2018/21491) [2025] ZAGPJHC 610 (13 June 2025)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_610.html
sino date 13 June 2025
SAFLII
Note:
Certain
personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been
redacted from this document in compliance with the law
and
SAFLII
Policy
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG)
CASE
NO: 2018/21491
(1)
REPORTABLE: YES / NO
(2)
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3)
REVISED: YES/NO
In
the matter between:
V[...]
W[...]
: K[…] M[…] obo
V[...] W[...]
:
C[...] C[...]
Plaintiff
# and
and
MEC FOR HEALTH,
GAUTENG PROVINCE Defendant
JUDGMENT
MABASA,
AJ
Introduction
1.
This is an action for damages in delict on behalf of a minor child
afflicted with cerebral palsy. The core issue for determination
is
the liability of the defendant (“ the MEC”) for the
conduct of its staff at a public hospital during the birth of
the
child.
Parties
2.
The plaintiff is KM v[...] W[...] (“Mrs v[...] W[...]”)
who acts in her representative capacity on behalf of
the minor child,
C[...] C[…] V[...] W[...] (“C[...]”) who was born
on 2 March 2008 at the Tshwane District Hospital
(“the
hospital”).
3.
The defendant is the MEC for Health, Gauteng Province.
Background
4.
It is common cause that C[...] suffers from cerebral palsy. What is
in dispute is whether
the nursing care provided
during C[...]’s birth at the hospital fell below the accepted
medical standard, and if so, whether
that substandard care caused
C[...] to suffer a brain injury resulting in cerebral palsy.
5.
The parties agreed that it
would be convenient to separate the issues of liability from that of
the quantum of the plaintiff’s
claim. An order to that effect
was granted in terms of Uniform Rule of Court 33(4) and the matter
proceeded to trial only on the
issues of negligence and liability.
The quantum of the plaintiff’s claim was postponed
sine
die
.
6.
The trial lasted for 10
days. The plaintiff testified in person. All the experts testified
virtually. The following experts testified
on behalf of the
plaintiff: Prof GB Theron (Obstetrician); Dr. D Pearce (Paediatric
Neurologist); Prof AGW Nolte (Speciality Nurse);
Prof J Smith
(Neonatologist) and Dr. Suzanne O’Hagan (Neuroradiologist). The
defendant called three factual witnesses and
the following experts:
Dr. Weinstein (Neuroradiologist); Dr. T M Marishane
(Obstetrician/Gynaecologist); Dr. Mogashoa (Paediatric
Neurologist);
Prof K Bolton (Paediatrician); Prof P A Cooper (Neonatologist).
7.
There is a sharp dispute between the Plaintiff’s experts and
the Defendant’s experts on the cause and the timing
of the
injury. The Plaintiff’s experts say it was the negligence of
the nursing staff during labour that led to hypoxia which
caused the
injury and that the injury had occurred intrapartum. The Defendant’s
experts say it was the sepsis that caused
apnoea after C[...] was
discharged and that it was the apnoea that caused the injury, which
accordingly occurred postnatally.
8.
All the expert witnesses had regard to the
hospital records and the clinical notes upon which their opinions
were based.
The documents are voluminous
and although all testimony was considered, what is reflected here are
mostly summaries.
9.
Neither the locus standi of any of the parties nor the vicarious
obligation of the defendant is in dispute and the court
must
determine:
(1)
Causal
negligence as pleaded in paragraphs 6 to 8.11 of the particulars of
the claim.
[1]
(2)
The existence of a duty of care of the staff and the defendant to
C[...] (in utero and as a neonate) and Mrs v[...] W[...],
which are
disputed in the plea.
Issues
10.
The issues for determination are:
i) Whether C[...]
suffered a hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury during birth. (The timing
issue).
ii) Whether the
defendant or its staff were negligent, and if so, whether such
negligence caused or materially contributed
to the hypoxic-ischaemic
brain injury in the sense that the hospital staff, by the exercise of
reasonable professional care and
skill, could have and should have
prevented the intrapartum hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury from
occurring. (The causative negligence
issue).
The
Plaintiff’s version
11.
Mrs V[...] W[...] testified that C[...] was
her firstborn child. She was 28 years old at the time of her
pregnancy. She attended
Skinner Street Clinic and consulted a private
practitioner, Dr. Heyns, on approximately three occasions during the
pregnancy. She
stated that her primary reason for consulting Dr.
Heyns was to determine the baby's sex. During these consultations,
Dr. Heyns
conducted medical assessments, including measuring her
blood pressure, listening to the baby's heartbeat, and performing a
sonographic
scan. He informed her that she was expecting a girl and
that there were no adverse findings.
12.
Mrs v[...] W[...] remained in good health
throughout her pregnancy. She also confirmed that she does not smoke
nor consume alcohol.
13.
During the early hours of the morning of 2
March 2008, she began experiencing contractions and proceeded to
Tshwane District Hospital
for delivery.
14.
Mrs V[...] W[...] gave evidence that during the birth process she was
intermittently assessed for dilatation, subjected
to a “belt
test” and she followed the bearing down instructions of the
midwives in attendance. The birth was difficult,
long and painful.
15.
She was attended by three midwives during labour:
one positioned at her feet, another holding her hand, and a third on
a stool beside
the bed. The third midwife applied pressure to her
abdomen above the ribcage in an effort to assist in the delivery. She
was instructed
to push whilst this third midwife
exerted a
single force of fundal pressure resulting in the immediate birth of
C[...] by unassisted vaginal delivery.
Upon
delivery, C[...] was not crying, and she was accused of having
"killed her child".
The midwife slapped C[...]
against Mrs V[...] W[...]’s thigh and took her behind a
curtain. It was only after a few minutes
that C[...] started crying.
She was wrapped in a blanket and handed to Mrs V[...] W[...], and
then placed in a crib while Mrs V[...]
W[...] was attended to.
16.
After delivery, she and C[...] were
transferred to a ward. Later that same evening she observed that
C[...] was not breathing properly
and alerted a nurse. C[...] was
taken away and subsequently placed in an incubator.
17.
The day following the birth, both Mrs
v[...] W[...] and C[...] were discharged from the hospital. Upon
arriving home, she noticed
that C[...]’s hands remained
clenched in a claw-like position near her head and that she exhibited
a bluish-purple discolouration
around the mouth and face. Concerned,
she returned to Dr. Heyns, who examined C[...] and provided a
referral letter, leading to
C[...]’s re-admission to the
hospital.
18.
Upon re-admission, blood tests were
conducted, and medical professionals assured Mrs. v[...] W[...] that
C[...] would be fine. However,
she stated that at no stage was she
informed of any formal diagnosis. She observed that C[...]’s
head was abnormally shaped,
resembling a “pawpaw”, and
that C[...]’s hands remained clenched.
19.
Mrs. v[...] W[...] further testified that
she was unable to breastfeed because C[...] did not latch and that
she did not produce
milk. Hospital staff provided her with formula
milk and a syringe for feeding, and she continued to feed C[...] in
this manner
after discharge.
20.
During cross examination Mrs. v[...] W[...]
was questioned regarding whether the bluish discolouration around
C[...]’s mouth
persisted the day after discharge, and she
confirmed that it did. She stated that at approximately midnight,
while still in the
hospital, C[...] had stopped breathing and was
placed in an incubator. Mrs. v[...] W[...] remained with her until
she resumed breathing
independently.
21.
It was put to Mrs. v[...] W[...] that it is
common cause that C[...] suffers from cerebral palsy, which she
confirmed. She testified
that upon returning home after discharge,
she became increasingly concerned about C[...]’s condition,
particularly noting
the persistent clenching of the hands and the
bluish discolouration.
22.
Mrs V[...] W[...] disputed entries in the
hospital records suggesting that she had been "restless"
during labour, maintaining
that she was stressed but not restless.
She was questioned as to whether the room in which she gave birth was
the same as the room
where she was initially admitted and she stated
that they were different. She could not recall whether the hospital
staff in both
rooms were the same.
23.
She confirmed that at the time of C[...]’s
birth, she was employed as a qualified daycare teacher. She was shown
the hospital
records and asked whether she had ever seen them before,
to which she responded that she had not. While she acknowledged that
she
was aware of hospital files being opened for both herself and
C[...], she stated that she had never seen their contents.
24.
Mr Soni (for the defendant) informed her
that all state hospitals are legally required to maintain records,
which she acknowledged.
She confirmed that various files were opened
for C[...]. She also confirmed that she provided information at
different points to
different medical personnel.
25.
When probed about specific dates and times
of the medical events, Mrs. V[...] W[...] stated that she could not
remember exact details.
She confirmed that different nurses and
doctors attended to her and C[...] on multiple occasions.
26.
She was asked whether she recalled specific
medical examinations, including whether a CTG (
Cardiotocography)
was performed or whether a Doppler machine was
used to listen to the baby's heartbeat, and whether she was given
pain medication.
She stated that she could not recall these details.
27.
She was questioned regarding an entry
indicating that she was asked to push at 19h00, to which she stated
she did not recall. It
was put to her that she was noted as being
"very restless and uncooperative" during delivery, which
she denied. She confirmed
that C[...] was born at 20h05.
28.
When asked whether an episiotomy was
performed, she stated that she did not know what it was. Mr Soni
explained the procedure as
a “cut in the uterus,” but she
maintained that she could not remember.
29.
Mrs. v[...] W[...] was asked whether C[...]
was kept with her after birth, to which she replied in the negative.
It was put to her
that C[...]’s colour was recorded as pink
after the birth, but she stated that she could not recall. She was
also questioned
about the baby's reflexes and meconium passage, to
which she responded that she could not recall.
30.
She disputed claims in the medical records
that she "was not pushing well." stating that she followed
the nurses’
instructions to push.
31.
She was questioned about the timing of her
legal action. She stated that she first contacted a lawyer in 2015
after discussing the
matter with her brother, a law student at the
time. Mr Soni suggested that her claim was a recent fabrication,
which led to a debate
regarding the relevance of her brother's
involvement.
32.
She was shown the particulars of claim and
amendments but stated that she had never seen them before. It was put
to her that the
term "you killed your baby" did not appear
in the particulars of claim.
33.
It was put to her that the hospital records
showed an entry that she had a UTI (urinary tract infection) and took
antibiotics on
2 February 2008. Her response was that she could not
remember.
34.
Mrs. v[...] W[...] testified that the
events occurred 16 years ago and that she was unable to recall all
details. Mr Soni highlighted
the discrepancies between her testimony
and hospital records and stated that the court would be asked to
accept the records as
correct.
35.
It was put to her that fundal pressure was
not recorded in the medical records, which she disputed, maintaining
that it had been
used during delivery. She also insisted that a staff
member had stated, "You killed your baby."
36.
During re-examination, Mr Uys (counsel for
Mrs v[...] W[...]) questioned her regarding the particulars of claim
and amendments.
She reiterated that she had never seen these
documents before that day.
Plaintiff’s
expert witnesses
37.
Dr.
O’ Hagan,
stated
that her evidence is based on current peer-reviewed literature and
clinical guidelines, including authoritative texts such
as those
authored by Prof. Joseph Volpe and reports by the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (ACOG).
[2]
38.
She testified that hypoxic-ischemic brain injury arises when
insufficient oxygen reaches the brain cells. This pathological
condition may occur in various clinical settings and manifests in
distinct patterns depending on the developmental stage of the
brain.
Neonatal hypoxic-ischemic injury is particularly sensitive to the age
and maturation of the patient, which significantly
influences
radiographic appearance on MRI.
39.
MRI patterns of injury vary depending on
the patient's age, and these patterns evolve over time from
hyperacute to chronic phases.
She emphasised the importance of
identifying the brain structures involved, as this helps determine
the injury mechanisms. Established
literature supports the
significance of central patterns (e.g., basal ganglia and thalami
involvement) and peripheral patterns.
These are the predominant
classifications recognised in both clinical and academic contexts.
She notes that historically, the term
"acute profound
hypoxic-ischemic injury" was used to describe a sudden and
severe interruption of oxygen supply.
40.
However, recent advancements in
literature since approximately 2018 have shifted the preferred
terminology to more precise anatomical
descriptions, such as “basal
ganglia-thalamus (BGT) injury,” often with perirolandic
cortical involvement. This evolution
in nomenclature is reflected in
current standards of radiological and neuropathological practice. In
this case, the injury pattern
observed in C[...] involved the basal
ganglia and thalami. According to her testimony this pattern does not
necessarily result
from a single acute event, as there are now
recognized mechanisms that can cause this injury from prolonged or
partial hypoxia,
which may involve intermittent asphyxia,
41.
In C[...]’s case, the MRI reveals
chronic-phase findings characterized by T2-weighted hyperintensities
in the bilateral thalami
and putamina, more pronounced on the right.
These findings are consistent with chronic cytotoxic oedema and
neuronal loss. Notably,
the brainstem and cerebellum are spared, and
there is no radiological evidence of watershed injury.
42.
According to Dr. O’Hagan, MRI is
capable of depicting gross anatomical injury but cannot resolve
individual neuronal injury.
For visualisation of injury patterns, a
sufficient volume of tissue must be involved. Images are typically
acquired in sagittal,
axial, and coronal planes, with axial views
offering particular utility in identifying hypoxic-ischemic changes.
43.
The MRI in C[...]’s case
demonstrates a severe Grade 3 parasagittal perirolandic injury, with
abnormal T2 signal extending
into the paracentral lobule and
supplementary motor area. At the level of the basal ganglia,
bilateral symmetric hyperintensity
is noted in the thalami and
putamina. These findings are consistent with a BGT pattern of injury,
and the absence of watershed
injury supports a non-diffuse
pathophysiology.
44.
She clarified that in term neonates,
that is babies defined radiologically as those born at or beyond 36
weeks of gestation, BGT
structures are metabolically active and
heavily myelinated, rendering them selectively vulnerable to hypoxic
injury.
45.
C[...]'s MRI findings align with the
deep nuclear injury pattern involving bilateral thalami, putamina,
perirolandic cortex, and
possibly the hippocampi. This pattern is
symmetric and central, characteristic of what literature terms
“cerebrocortical
deep nuclear injury.”
There is
significant atrophy, ventricular dilatation, and microcephaly, but no
evidence of congenital anomalies or infections.
46.
Although
historically associated with single acute profound sentinel events,
emerging consensus—including Volpe’s 2018
and 2023
editions, the 2019 ACOG guidance, and Wisnowski (2021)
[3]
acknowledges
that this pattern may result from either a single acute sentinel
event, or prolonged partial hypoxia with intermittent
near-total
asphyxial episodes.
47.
Dr. O’ Hagan provided the
following helpful illustrative analogy; if a child is repeatedly
submerged in water (like being
thrown into a swimming pool) with each
recovery being incomplete, eventually, the child’s capacity for
recovery is exceeded,
resulting in injury. This scenario is analogous
to repeated uterine contractions that progressively reduce
oxygenation during birth.
In a similar example intermittent pressure,
like stepping on a garden hose gradually reduces water flow until it
ceases entirely.
This represents how repeated partial hypoxic events
may culminate in permanent brain injury.
48.
In summary she testified that the MRI
findings in C[...]’s case are indicative of chronic BGT-type
injury consistent with
current neuropathological and radiological
classifications. These findings are in line with accepted
contemporary literature and
reflect a sophisticated understanding of
neonatal brain injury mechanisms.
49.
She noted that it is not within the
scope of the radiologist’s expertise to confirm the occurrence
of a sentinel event. Rather,
her role is to accurately identify and
categorize anatomical injury patterns. In this case, the imaging
findings are consistent
with a BGT injury pattern, which, according
to current medical consensus, may be attributable to either acute or
serial hypoxic
events.
50.
For this specific case, MRI showed
characteristic signs of injury in the basal ganglia and thalami,
along with severe perirolandic
cortex involvement. She emphasised
that while MRI cannot confirm the precise cause of the injury, it
clearly shows a pattern of
injury consistent with the BGT (basal
ganglia-thalamus) pattern, which can result from either a single
severe event or multiple
less severe events over time.
51.
Dr.
O’Hagan highlighted that this injury pattern is well-documented
in the literature, including work from prominent sources
like Volpe's
neonatology texts and the Newborn Brain Society.
[4]
She further clarified that MRI, rather than CT scan, is crucial for
detecting these types of injuries, and suggested that the injury
could have been caused by serial partial insults rather than a single
acute episode.
52.
Under
cross examination Mr Soni put it to her that
this pattern could only result from a
single
acute profound event
,
but Dr. O’ Hagan disagreed, stating that the absence of a
clear
sentinel
event
does
not exclude
prolonged
hypoxia
as
the cause. She maintained that C[...]’s MRI shows a
basal
ganglia-thalamus (BGT) and perirolandic injury pattern
,
which
aligns with evolving literature recognising that
prolonged
partial asphyxia
can
cause BGT injury.
53.
Dr.
O Hagan rejected the term
"acute
profound" hypoxic-ischemic injury
,
citing that
medical
literature
since 2018, including works by Wisnowski and Miser, has moved away
from this terminology in favour of anatomical descriptions like
BGT
injury
.
54.
Mr
Soni suggested that the old terminology was still used in some
practices as late as 2020, but Dr. O’Hagan emphasised that
this
terminology implies causation rather than just anatomical damage,
which is why it is now discouraged. She explained that the
current
understanding of
hypoxic-ischemic
injury
recognises
that
multiple
mechanisms
,
including
prolonged
partial asphyxia
or
serial hypoxic events, can lead to BGT injury, not just a single
catastrophic event.
55.
Mr
Soni asked whether BGT injury could result from multiple hypoxic
episodes postnatally, and then she confirmed that such a pattern
could indeed emerge from
prolonged
or severe hypoxia
after
birth.
56.
Mr
Soni raised concerns about the relevance of
primate
studies
in
supporting human medical conclusions. Dr. O’Hagan acknowledged
the limitations but affirmed that findings from primate
models
suggest patterns similar to those observed in human infants. She
maintained that while conclusions in medical literature
may not be
definitive, the
strong
body of evidence
supports
the view that
cumulative
hypoxic events
can
result in BGT injury, reflecting the evolving understanding in the
field.
57.
Prof. Anna Nolte, an expert midwife,
provided detailed evidence about the purpose of guidelines for
healthcare workers providing obstetric and anaesthetic services
in
public hospitals. These guidelines address the lack of standardised
protocols in primary and secondary healthcare, which has
led to high
pregnancy-related deaths. They focus on identifying and managing
complications, including timely referrals to higher
levels of care.
58.
She also explained maternal care
protocols, stating that a partogram is a chart/graph that tracks
maternal and foetal condition,
labour progress, including cervical
dilation, uterine contractions, and foetal descent. Alert and action
lines monitor labour progress,
with action required if dilation
exceeds set thresholds.
59.
She explained the stages of labour and
the importance of the four P’s of labour: the Passenger
(foetus, position, head moulding,
condition), the Passage (maternal
pelvis and birth canal), the Powers (strength and frequency of
uterine contractions), and the
Patient (maternal condition and
readiness for delivery). The stages of labour are first stage
(cervical dilation up to 10 cm, with
specific monitoring frequencies
during latent and active phases), second stage (begins at full
dilation and ends with delivery),
and third stage (delivery of the
placenta).
60.
Foetal monitoring is crucial to detect signs of distress. Normal
foetal heart rate (FHR) is 120–160 bpm. Variability
below 5 bpm
or decelerations indicate potential distress and require
intervention. Monitoring intervals vary by labour stage, with
additional monitoring during the second stage and after contractions.
61.
Signs of foetal distress include abnormal FHR, lack of variability,
or meconium-stained liquor. In such cases, the staff
should
immediately position the mother laterally, administer oxygen and IV
fluids, and perform a vaginal exam to exclude cord prolapse.
If
delivery is imminent, proceed with vacuum delivery; otherwise,
prepare for caesarean section.
62.
Newborns are assessed using the APGAR score at 1 and 5 minutes to
evaluate breathing, muscle tone, colour, and responsiveness.
Routine
care is provided if the baby is born at term with clear amniotic
fluid, breathing/crying, good muscle tone, and pink skin.
63.
She mentioned that labour management tools include a Doppler
(handheld device) for monitoring foetal heart rate and a
cardiotocography (CTG) for continuous monitoring of heart rate and
contractions, with stored tracings in patient files.
64.
Prof.
Nolte reviewed C[...]’s obstetric clinical records. The records
show that Mrs V[...] W[...] walked in at 6:50 am, was
a primigravida
(first pregnancy) at 40 weeks’ gestation, and had complained of
lower abdominal pain since 3h30 am that morning.
65.
A
CTG
was
done, and it was described as
reactive
,
suggesting normal foetal heart rate variability and reactivity.
However, the
contractions
probe was not working
,
meaning one of the two CTG probes (the one that measures uterine
contractions) did not register. Prof. Nolte explained that this
probe
is typically placed on the top part of the maternal abdomen to
monitor contractions. It is crucial to monitor both the foetal
heart
rate and contractions simultaneously for meaningful interpretation.
66.
Despite the probe malfunction, the midwife palpated contractions
manually. The record shows 2 contractions in 10 minutes,
a standard
way to quantify frequency. The midwife interpreted the CTG as
reactive and performed a vaginal examination, assessing
cervical
dilatation, station, effacement, and application, bulging membranes,
and completed a full maternal assessment.
67.
Mrs
V[...] W[...] was admitted to the waiting room for further
management. During the latent phase, the foetal heart rate was 145
bpm, strong contractions occurred at 10h00, blood pressure, pulse,
and temperature were recorded, and no problems were found.
68.
Mrs V[...] W[...]’s labour
partogram (“the partogram”) was compared with the
guideline partogram (“the guideline
partogram”). Prof.
Nolte explained that the guideline partogram is more detailed and
standardised for assessing foetal distress,
especially when
interpreting foetal heart rate in relation to contractions. The
provincial record partogram (used for Mrs V[...]
W[...]) only
provides a line for writing foetal heart rate, without guidance on
variability or decelerations. The guideline recommends
recording
foetal heart rate before, during, and after a contraction.
69.
Prof. Nolte pointed out that the
provincial record partogram lacks the necessary detail to
differentiate heart rate readings before
and after contractions.
Symbols like circles or crosses should be used for this purpose, but
they are absent. The provincial record
partogram and notes also do
not indicate whether the foetal heart rate was recorded relative to
contractions.
70.
At 12h00, the Active Phase Record of
Labour (a contemporaneous note of progress) shows a foetal heart rate
of 140 bpm, moderate
to strong contractions, and an unclear note
indicating 3 contractions in 10 minutes. This matches the partogram’s
stable
heart rate of 130 bpm at 11h30.
71.
Prof.
Nolte observed that from 12h00 to 14h00, contractions were
consistently described as strong and occurred at a steady frequency
(3 in 10 minutes). However, from 14h00 onwards, the partogram shifted
to simply describe contractions as ‘strong’,
as indicated
by changes in the graph’s shading or colouring.
72.
At 17h30, the patient was 9 cm dilated,
but the partogram does not record the strength or frequency of
contractions. Only a single
foetal heart rate entry is visible.
She
compared this with the active phase record of labour which shows the
following:
•
13h30 – Moderate
contractions, likely “3 in 10”
•
15h30 – Strong
contractions, 3 in 10, and 8 cm dilation
•
17h30 – Strong
contractions and 9 cm dilation
73.
19h00 – Patient found with strong
contractions, but not reassessed at 18h30.
The birth occurs at
20h05.
74.
During the second stage of labour, the cervix is fully dilated (10
cm) but Mrs V[...] W[...] is noted as restless and
uncooperative.
Clinical guidelines allow up to 2 hours before pushing once the
cervix is fully dilated, especially if the head
of the foetus still
high.
75.
Another concerning factor is that the level of the foetal
head is not recorded. On the partogram the descent
is
marked as “1” consistently at 11h30, 13h30, 15h30,
and 17h30. From 17h30 onward, no station data is
recorded,
indicating no tracking of descent at a crucial stage of labour.
76.
Moulding and caput remain unmarked (indicated by a dash). Effacement
is poorly recorded and possibly misrepresented as
values like ‘4’,
‘3’, and ‘2’, which Prof. Nolte explains is
invalid. Effacement should be
noted in centimetres or percentages.
Application (how well the foetal head is applied to the cervix) is
consistently marked as
‘fair’.
77.
Prof. Nolte noted that the patient’s labour progress as
recorded in the partogram was as follows: at 11h30, she
was in the
active phase at 5 cm dilation, progressing to 6 cm at 13h30. However,
this was slower than expected, as she had crossed
the alert line.
78.
From 13h30
to 15h30 and 15h30 to 17h30, progress resumes at the expected 1 cm
per hour. However, expected dilation of 10 cm at 17h30,
is only
recorded as reached at 19:00. This delay means she had crossed both
the
alert
and
action
lines
on the partogram, the latter typically signalling the need for
hospital-level intervention if in a community clinic.
79.
Prof. Nolte explained that each block on the partogram represents an
hour. By 19h00, the dilation curve would be four
hours beyond the
alert line, placing it on the action line, which supports concerns
about delayed or inadequate clinical response.
80.
The second stage of labour began at 19h00, as per the earlier entry.
She explained the clinical management algorithm:
if the head is still
high after full dilation, there is a 2-hour window for descent before
pushing starts. If the head is on the
perineum, the pushing phase
allows for 45 minutes. If the patient starts pushing, the 45-minute
rule applies before the second
stage is considered prolonged. This
was not followed.
81.
The third stage ended at 8h15 pm. There is no record of a doctor
assisting during labour.
82.
Prof.
Nolte further testified that C[...]’s birth metrics were
all within normal parameters for a full-term female baby; weight
3.314 kg, length 52 cm, and head circumference 33 cm.
83.
Her
Apgar
Scores:1 Minute
:
Score
of 4/10, with 1 each for heart rate, respiratory effort, muscle tone,
colour, and 0 for reflexes
.
5
Minutes
:
Improved
to 6/10. Reflexes and respiratory effort showed slight improvement;
cyanosis persisted.
10
Minutes
:
Reached
9/10, with all parameters scoring 2 except reflexes (1).
84.
Prof. Nolte explained C[...]’s lack of reflexes (0 at 1 minute)
as a sign of hypoxia, which affected her neurological
response at
birth. Normally, newborns respond to stimuli, but C[...] was
initially unresponsive.
85.
A score of 4/10 at one minute was concerning. Resuscitative efforts,
including oxygen administration, improved C[...]’s
condition.
Ideal scores are 9–10, with scores below 7 indicating clinical
concern. C[...] passed meconium, cried, and was
resuscitated with 2L
oxygen and suction. These observations were likely made after 10
minutes of birth.
86.
Prof. Nolte noted late decelerations in the first tracing on the CTG,
suggesting foetal distress. The second tracing showed
a prolonged
deceleration after contractions, while the third tracing indicated
tachycardia, possibly also indicating foetal distress.
87.
It is recorded that the CTG was stopped because the patient was too
restless. Despite restlessness, continuous monitoring
using a Doppler
device should have been continued after these late decelerations,
which should have prompted immediate medical
intervention, including
intrauterine resuscitation.
88.
In summary, Prof Nolte’s evidence was to the effect that Mrs
v[...] W[...]’s labour progressed slowly, with
cervical
dilation crossing the alert line by 13:30. Despite some progress, her
active labour phase remained suboptimal, with delayed
cervical
dilation and increasing foetal heart rates. Pethidine and Atarax were
administered, and Mrs V[...] W[...] became very
restless and
uncooperative during labour. Continuous foetal monitoring was
compromised due to poor CTG contact, and foetal heart
rate recordings
were incomplete—especially during the second stage of labour
between 18h30 and 20h05. An alive female infant
was delivered at
20h05 with low Apgar scores of 4, 6, and 9, requiring oxygen and
suction resuscitation. Though initially stable,
the baby exhibited
poor sucking reflexes and was later discharged despite feeding
difficulties and early signs of distress.
89.
Therefore, it is her opinion that the care rendered was sub-standard:
maternal and foetal observations were not performed
according to
national maternity guidelines, the slow labour progress was not
escalated, foetal distress was not timely recognised,
and a
vulnerable newborn was prematurely roomed-in and discharged without
appropriate medical referral.
90.
Under cross-examination, Prof. Nolte maintained her belief that
decelerations were likely pathological. She disagreed
with the
version put to her that Dr. Marishane’s view is that
variability was preserved and decelerations were artefacts
caused by
poor transducer contact. She stressed that decelerations, regardless
of variability, warrant caution and further monitoring.
91.
Prof.
Theron
also
provided detailed evidence on the partogram entries, which will not
be repeated as it largely corresponds with Prof. Nolte’s
observations. Notably, he also observed that cervical dilatation was
slower than expected.
Labour
progression was documented as follows: at
11h30
– 5 cm
,
at
15h30
– 8 cm
,
at
17h30
– 9 cm, at 19h00 – fully dilated (10 cm).
92.
Under normal circumstances, the cervix
should dilate by 1 centimeter per hour. However, Mrs V[...] W[...]’s
progress was slower
than anticipated, as one would normally expect
full dilation (10 centimeters) by 17h30. The slow progress should
have prompted
the midwives to notify the attending doctor at the
hospital.
93.
He also confirmed that the partogram used
during Mrs V[...] W[...]’s 2008 delivery was outdated.
Maternity care guidelines
introduced a new version in 2006 or 2007.
The revised partogram has a new action line, two hours to the left of
the original, indicating
prompt intervention when labour progresses
to this line. However, in this case measures to expedite delivery
were not implemented.
94.
The
CTG
tracings
showed
baseline
variability
,
but also periods of
lost
contact
and
decelerations
.
Poor
quality
in
some areas, partly due to
maternal
restlessness
.
95.
He testified that nursing staff must report any deviations from
expected clinical patterns, especially concerning foetal
conditions
during labour. Continuous foetal monitoring is crucial, and
decelerations in the foetal heart rate should be interpreted
in the
context of uterine contractions. Early decelerations may coincide
with contractions, while variable decelerations may occur
independently. Late decelerations, which begin after a contraction’s
peak and return to baseline, indicate foetal distress.
96.
During labour, especially the second stage, continuous
cardiotocography (CTG) is crucial. Mrs v[...] W[...] was restless,
which is normal during the second stage, especially for first-time
mothers. The records indicate that the CTG was stopped. However,
foetal heart rate should be assessed with each contraction, before,
during, and after, using either CTG or a Doppler every 30 minutes.
Maternal observations are usually done every two hours.
97.
At full cervical dilation (10 cm), the decision was made to instruct
the patient to push. However, the records show that
Mrs V[...] W[...]
was restless, not pushing effectively, and uncooperative, each rated
at 3+. While midwives are expected to provide
guidance during this
stage, standard practice dictates that pushing should only begin when
the foetal head is less than two-fifths
above the pelvic brim (here
it is noted as 1/5 on the partogram). A first-time mother is
generally given 45 minutes for effective
pushing; if delivery has not
occurred by then, the midwife must alert the attending physician for
potential intervention.
98.
Progress during labour must be closely monitored. Slow cervical
dilation, particularly between 8 and 9 cm, should raise
concerns
about a potential prolonged second stage. Reassessment should occur
within an hour of noted stagnation, and if progress
remains
inadequate, the physician must be informed promptly to evaluate for
surgical or assisted delivery.
99.
According to Prof. Theron the foetal heart rate monitoring was
inadequate. The CTG documentation lacks sufficient correlation
between decelerations and uterine contractions, making it unreliable
for assessment of the foetal condition.
100.
Mrs V[...] W[...]’s labour lasted 16 hours, with the second
stage lasting 1 hour and 5 minutes. Cervical dilation
from 5 cm at
11h30 should have reached full dilation by 16:30. However, it
progressed slowly between 15h30 and 19h00, suggesting
an abnormal
labour pattern. A timely reassessment at 17h30, when dilation had
only advanced from 8 to 9 cm, could have allowed
for corrective
action. The delay in response likely contributed to the adverse
outcome.
101.
He stated that signs of foetal compromise were evident as early as
14h20, according to the CTG tracings. Allowing labour
to continue
into a prolonged and difficult second stage under such conditions was
inadvisable. The "golden rule" in such
cases is to suppress
labour and proceed with a caesarean delivery when foetal well-being
is at risk.
102.
Notably, fundal pressure was applied at delivery. This manoeuvre is
controversial and not endorsed in clinical training
due to associated
risks. In this case, its contribution to the adverse outcome is
considered minimal, though its use remains a
point of concern.
103.
Prof. Theron noted that insofar as the condition of the foetus at
birth is concerned, the neonatologist is the most appropriate
person
to evaluate neonatal outcomes. However, the presence of poor muscle
tone and lack of responsiveness are alarming signs,
warranting
serious concern from an obstetric perspective.
104.
During cross-examination, it was put to him
that Dr. Marishane is of the view that there was no delay in
delivery, citing the World
Health Organization’s position. Dr.
Marishane further argues that there was no evidence to suggest
instrumental delivery
was indicated, and that if used, it is often
blamed for cerebral palsy, and there was no need to expedite
delivery.
105.
Prof. Theron disagreed. He believed that if
the attending physician had been promptly notified when slow progress
was observed (at
13h30, 15h30, and 17h30), the doctor would have been
more alert to the potential for a difficult delivery. Early
notification could
have prevented the prolonged second stage of
labour.
106.
Regarding the CTG it was put to him that
Dr. Marishane argues that the tracing from 14h17 onward shows poor
contact of the transducer,
and that the observed decelerations,
though accompanied by good variability, are not pathological.
107.
Prof. Theron disagreed with this
proposition. The FIGO classification system clearly distinguishes
between normal, suspicious, and
pathological CTG tracings. Even if
light decelerations occur with good variability over 30 minutes, the
pattern should be considered
pathological. The FIGO classification
says a pathological CTG has a sustained baseline foetal heart rate
below 100 beats per minute.
However, prolonged
decelerations—especially if they last 20 to 30 minutes—are
abnormal, even with good variability.
108.
Prof. Theron says the CTG data,
particularly from 14h17 to 14h47, clearly shows a 30-minute period of
decelerations that meet the
criteria for a pathological CTG. This
should have prompted concern about the foetal condition and immediate
intervention, rather
than allowing labour to continue.
109.
Prof. Smith,
explained
that neonatal encephalopathy is a condition characterised by altered
consciousness, changes in primitive reflexes, difficulty
latching,
sucking, and swallowing, and altered muscle tone, which can make a
baby hypertonic, hypotonic, or fluctuate between these
states.
Seizures may also occur. Encephalopathy is a general term for these
features, but they can be caused by factors other than
intrapartum
hypoxic-ischemic injury. Therefore, when evaluating cases of cerebral
palsy, it is important to exclude other potential
causes that might
mimic encephalopathy.
110.
He stated that neonatal encephalopathy,
appearing within the first few hours to two or three days after
birth, in conjunction with
cerebral palsy, and alternative causes
ruled out, suggests intrapartum hypoxic-ischemic injury. Labour and
delivery events are
critically evaluated, starting with the antenatal
period to check for maternal hypoxic illness or predisposing
conditions, then
moving to the intrapartum period.
111.
He agreed with Prof. Theron’s
explanation that CTG tracings during labour showed serious warning
signs that the foetus was
at risk for a long time, but no effective
intervention was taken.
112.
He stated that C[...] was born in a state
of secondary apnea, not breathing, with bradycardia, and requiring
resuscitative measures,
as confirmed by Prof. Cooper. Secondary apnea
is severe and can be fatal if left uncorrected. It suggests a
preceding period of
primary apnea, indicating a hypoxic insult during
the second stage of labour, when maternal pushing intensifies the
forces. Despite
clear CTG warnings during this critical period,
appropriate intervention was not initiated, leaving the baby in a
compromised condition.
113.
He
explained that during labour, the foetus experienced
progressive
hypoxia
,
a lack of oxygen, that gradually depleted its energy reserves. This
culminated in a critical event, described metaphorically as
going
over a "waterfall edge," where the foetus transitioned
from
primary
to secondary apnoea
.
This stage involves significant
acid-base
imbalance
,
due to a shift to
anaerobic
metabolism
,
leading to
acidosis
and
multi-organ
effects
.
114.
At birth,
C[...] was
compromised
and required resuscitation
,
although no
blood
gas test
was
performed to confirm the metabolic state, a key missed opportunity.
She was later diagnosed with
early-onset
neonatal encephalopathy
,
initially mild but worsening after an
inappropriately
early discharge
.
C[...] was readmitted to hospital within 5.5 hours of discharge
with
more
severe symptom
s
,
including
cyanosis
at
home.
115.
The brain injury pattern, affecting the basal ganglia, thalamus, and
perirolandic cortex, suggests acute profound hypoxic-ischemic
injury,
requiring 10–20 minutes of severe circulatory failure. However,
no evidence supports such a prolonged collapse. The
previous expert
witnesses (like Dr. O Hagan) believe progressive hypoxia during
labour, especially in a vulnerable foetus, led
to decompensation, as
evidenced by foetal heart rate abnormalities.
116.
Prof. Smith
is of the view that there is
no
indication of antenatal brain injury
,
and the injury was not caused postnatally. Both Prof Nolte and Theron
pointed out how the midwives
missed
warning signs,
and
inadequately
managed foetal distress
during
labour. After birth, further
substandard
care
,
particularly the
failure
to admit C[...] to high or intensive care
,
as per 2006 Department of Health guidelines, potentially worsened her
condition.
117.
Neonates face a critical recovery period in the first six hours after
birth, during which they are vulnerable to secondary
energy failure
due to factors like hypoglycaemia, seizures, infection, hyperthermia,
and oxygen mismanagement. C[...] exhibited
feeding difficulties,
desaturation episodes, and seizures, which were poorly monitored.
Oxygenation management was inadequate,
with non-standard practices
like ‘double oxygen’ delivery. Despite these challenges,
she was eventually was stabilised
and transferred to Pretoria
Academic Hospital
118.
The results
of C[...]’s blood tests and laboratory findings showed evidence
of
metabolic
acidosis
,
kidney
injury
,
elevated
inflammatory markers
,
and
possible
dehydration
.
Although
a
urinary
tract infection
(
UTI)
was suspected, urine cultures did not confirm this
.
119.
More
importantly, Prof. Smith stated there is
no
credible evidence linking the UTI to the specific brain injury
,
which
is not typically associated with infection-related patterns.
Literature supports that
neonatal
infections more commonly cause white matter injury
,
not the
deep grey matter injury seen in this case.
120.
C[...]
had various episodes of seizure activity
consistent
with
moderate
encephalopathy
.
This
further supports a significant perinatal hypoxic event. The
cranial
ultrasound
performed
three days post-birth showed no signs of
pre-existing
injury or infection
,
reinforcing that the insult occurred
during
labour
.
121.
Finally,
Prof Smith is of the view that while studies show
inflammation
may
worsen hypoxic-ischemic injury, there is
no
conclusive evidence
that
it played a significant role in this case. Systematic reviews
found
no
clear link
between
perinatal infection and worsened outcomes in neonatal encephalopathy,
and further research is needed.
122.
Dr. Debbie Pearce
testified
that
C[...] displays profound disability with mixed-type
cerebral palsy, predominantly dystonic in nature, which is
considered
one of the most severe presentations. She is totally
dependent her caregivers for daily activities.
123.
According to Dr. Pearce her injuries align with a PBGT injury
pattern typical of chronic hypoxic-ischemic
injury, likely
resulting from intrapartum hypoxia. There is no evidence of
genetic, inflammatory, or infective pathology on
imaging.
124.
In a joint minute with Dr. Mogashoa the experts agreed on:
·
The mixed nature of cerebral palsy;
·
Presence of multiple comorbidities;
·
A diagnosis of Grade 2 neonatal
encephalopathy;
·
MRI findings indicative of chronic PBGT
pattern injury;
125.
Dr. Mogashoa deferred interpretation of MRI to radiologists and
acknowledged infection as a possible contributing cause
of hypoxia.
Both experts deferred final conclusions on infection and postnatal
care to neonatology experts. Possible causes of
neonatal
encephalopathy considered included:
·
Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy
(HIE) (primary diagnosis)
·
Infection
·
Congenital anomalies
·
Metabolic disorders
·
Placental insufficiency
·
Intrauterine growth restriction
·
Inborn errors of metabolism
126.
Despite some evidence of infection (e.g., raised WCC, CRP, and a UTI
diagnosis), the dominant cause of C[...]’s
condition
was deemed to be intrapartum hypoxia.
127.
In their application of the of ACOG criteria the following were
noted:
·
Neonatal encephalopathy (Grade 2
)
was
present
·
Apgar scores (6 at 5 minutes, 9 at
10 minutes) did not meet the <5 threshold
·
No cord blood gases available
·
MRI findings consistent with HIE
·
No confirmed sentinel event
·
Multisystem involvement (neurological,
renal) present
128.
Dr. Pearce noted that according to the mother’s presentation of
the clinical history, C[...] did not cry immediately
at birth, and
stopped breathing later that night . Convulsions occurred within 24
hours. She was readmitted on the same day with
oxygen needs and
feeding difficulties. Following re-admission, she was diagnosed with
a UTI and had a non-contributory lumbar puncture.
129.
She agreed with the previous experts who testified on behalf of the
plaintiff that the deterioration of C[...]’s
condition
post-discharge was part of a continuum of the initial
hypoxic insult, not a new event.
130.
Dr. Pierce stated that insofar as the infection was concerned no
microbial growth was confirmed. While infection may
have been a risk
factor, it was not the primary cause. The clinical and
radiological evidence supports hypoxic-ischemic
encephalopathy as the central aetiology.
131.
With regard to the timing of the injury no significant antenatal risk
factors were identified. The pattern and chronic
nature of injury
suggest that it occurred shortly before delivery, not
antenatally or postnatally.
132.
During cross-examination she stated that ACOG criteria are not a
checklist but rather guide. The Apgar scores and absent
cord gas data
were acknowledged as limitations. Neurological dysfunction is a
prerequisite of neonatal encephalopathy and therefore
not listed as
an additional system involvement. Apnoea was interpreted as
neurological in origin, with respiratory distress potentially
reflecting acidosis.
Defendant’s
expert witnesses
133.
Dr. Marishane testified that the progression of labour was within
normal limits. A delay occurred between 5 cm and
6 cm cervical
dilation, lasting approximately two hours, but this did not
cross the action line on the partogram.
Historically, a
cervical dilation rate of 1 cm/hour during the active phase was
used as a standard, but this assumption,
especially for first-time
mothers, has been scientifically discredited. The WHO no longer
recommends this outdated threshold,
recognizing that labour
progresses at different rates for different women. Reliance on this
standard has led to unnecessary
interventions, including caesarean
sections and artificial labour augmentation.
134.
He stated that he idea that caesarean section prevents cerebral
palsy is not supported by credible evidence.
Caesarean
sections, whether elective or emergency, have not been shown to
reduce the incidence of cerebral palsy. Only a small
fraction of cerebral palsy cases are caused by acute intrapartum
hypoxia. Notably, emergency caesarean sections are associated
with a higher incidence of cerebral palsy, likely because these
procedures are usually performed after foetal injury
has already
occurred.
135.
He cited the 2018 WHO review and provided the following
insights:
·
There is no universally accepted
definition for prolonged first stage of labour.
·
Traditional thresholds used to define
prolonged labour were based more on clinical
custom than scientific evidence.
·
The WHO meta-analysis found no
sound justification for using strict time limits to diagnose
prolonged first-stage labour.
·
Therefore, the term “prolonged
first stage” is now viewed as vague and unsuitable for
guiding interventions.
136.
Regarding the second stage of labour he said that this stage
begins at full cervical dilation and ends
with delivery.
FIGO recommends a maximum of two hours for this stage.
WHO permits up to three hours in
women receiving epidural
anaesthesia. In Mrs V[...] W[...]’s case, the second stage did
not exceed the two-hour
limit.
137.
During
cross examination Dr. Marishane
initially
resisted
applying
a strict 1 cm/hour dilatation standard, citing WHO's evolving stance,
but eventually
conceded
that the action line had been crossed
by
19h00. He also acknowledged that an
examination
at 18h30 was omitted
but
maintained that intervention was not mandatory at that point because
the patient was already in hospital.
138.
With
regard to foetal monitoring and CTG analysis
Dr.
Marishane
disputed
Prof. Theron’s interpretation
,
attributing CTG unreliability to
maternal
restlessness
,
and claimed that standard tools like
Doppler
or stethoscope
could
suffice. He insisted that
t
he
nursing
records showed no abnormalities
,
and
no
escalation was warranted
unless
documented concerns existed.
139.
Mr Uys
challenged Dr. Marishane's reliance on
nursing
records
that
lacked detail on heart rate timing relative to contractions, as well
as the
absence
of documented abnormalities
as
a basis to conclude there were none.
140.
Dr.
Marishane defended his stance, asserting that he interpreted the
records
in
good faith
.
Clinical
trust
in
the nursing staff is standard unless there's evidence of error. His
analysis did not reflect
bias
but followed accepted practice.
141.
Dr.
Weinstein
stated that his report describes abnormalities observed in a
10-year-old C[...]’s MRI, particularly affecting the bilateral
thalamus, putamen, corona radiata, and periventricular subcortical
white matter. He characterized the injury as an
“
acute
profound”
pattern,
meaning it resulted from a short, severe hypoxic event, with no signs
of a
“
partial
prolonged”
injury,
indicating the absence of an extended hypoxic episode.
142.
Dr.
Weinstein explained that the MRI, taken when C[...] was over 10 years
old, showed
no
recent injury
,
supported by the lack of diffusion restriction on the
diffusion-weighted imaging sequence. However, he acknowledged
the
limitations
of MRI
in
determining the precise timing or cause of an injury, stating that
such conclusions require correlation with
clinical,
laboratory, and serial imaging data
.
143.
He noted
that the cranial ultrasound done on
day
4 of C[...]’s life
was
normal. There were no signs of mass effect, echogenic abnormalities,
or early oedema changes typical of perinatal hypoxic events.
This,
according to Dr. Weinstein, makes it unlikely that the injury
occurred shortly before or during labour.
144.
While both
Dr. Weinstein and Dr. O’Hagan agreed on
which
brain regions
were
affected, they differed on the terminology. Dr. O’Hagan
preferred anatomically descriptive terms and cited the
Wisnowski
article
,
which cautions against traditional pathophysiological labels. In
contrast, Dr. Weinstein defended the use of
“
acute
profound
”
,
citing long-standing international neuroradiology literature,
including work by
Prof.
Barkovich
and
Dr.
Masser
,
asserting that these terms remain valid when paired with clinical
context.
[5]
145.
Dr.
Weinstein addressed interpretations from the
Wisnowski
article
,
stating that while some animal studies suggest intermittent hypoxia
could lead to basal ganglia-thalamus (BGT) injury, there is
no
clinical evidence in humans
supporting
this assumption. He emphasized that such a pattern usually reflects
a
single,
severe hypoxic event
,
even if it was clinically silent at the time.
146.
Dr.
Weinstein categorised C[...]’s injury as fitting the
acute
profound
profile
---severe, short-duration hypoxia affecting metabolically sensitive
regions. There were
no
features of a watershed pattern
,
which would suggest a more prolonged or intermittent event.
147.
Under cross
examination Dr. Weinstein accepted that here were
periods
of slow progress
,
especially
between
15h30
and 17h30
,
and
again until
19h00
.
According
to protocol, this met the definition of
slow
progress
and
could
cross
the action line on the partogram
,
prompting
medical
review or intervention
.
Although
clinical judgment also plays a role, the observed delays warranted
closer monitoring and possibly
escalation
of care
.
148.
He also
accepted that
delays
in the first stage
can
increase
the risk of second-stage delays
.
Therefore,
proactive management was warranted once full dilation was reached
at
19h00
,
given the
earlier
background of delay
.
He agreed it would have been
reasonable
to involve senior clinicians
at
that point.
149.
With
regard to the CTG tracings Dr. Weinstein acknowledged that The CTG
was
not
ideal
for
stand-alone decision-making.
Decelerations
and reduced variability
were
observed. He also agreed that in such cases, clinicians should
use
alternative
monitoring methods
(
e.g.,
handheld Doppler or stethoscope). The CTG
could
have
warranted heightened vigilance
and
possibly
intervention
.
150.
Dr.
Weinstein acknowledged several
shortcomings
in clinical management
,
including
delays
in reassessment
,
failure
to escalate
,
and
insufficient
documentation
.
He supported the view that these issues fell short of expected
standards but maintained that the available evidence was
insufficient
to conclusively establish causation
.
151.
Prof.
Bolton
was of the view that even though C[...] had low
APGAR
scores at birth, she
was
breathing but not crying
,
which is
not
unusual
.
She
received
supplemental
oxygen and suctioning
,
but
no
records
showed
positive
pressure ventilation (PPV)
,
bagging
,
or
intubation
.
He
stated
such
interventions would typically be documented
if
performed.
152.
C[...]’s
vital signs were monitored and a raised temperature (
36.1–37.4°C)
was recorded. This was not seen as abnormal.
Blood
pressure
and
oxygen
saturation
were
not measured, which Prof. Bolton deemed standard unless she was
in
intensive
care
.
153.
The
nursing notes
and
a
control
chart
documented
feeding difficulties such as a poor
latch
and unsatisfactory sucking reflex
.
C[...] was fed with
formula
(NAN).
154.
She was
placed on
oxygen
and
later appeared
pink
,
indicating improvement. Prof Bolton acknowledged
poor
sucking reflex
is
more
concerning
than
poor latch and requires
closer
observation
.
He
agreed that babies showing such signs should be
carefully
monitored before discharge
.
155.
Mr Uys put
it to him that C[...] displayed
early
signs of HIE (hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy)
.
Prof Bolton initially
denied
clear evidence of encephalopathy
,
but conceded that if the
mother’s
account is accurate
and C[...] was placed in an incubator she
should
not
have been discharged. Prof.
Bolton
stated that he did not have records on the incubator use and did not
comment on it.
156.
Prof.
Smuts
is employed at
Steve
Biko
Academic Hospital
.
She is of the view that C[...]’s treatment followed hospital
protocols;
antibiotics
and
anticonvulsants
were
administered for
seizures,
apnoea, and breathing issues
.
She supported
neonatal
sepsis
,
potentially
caused by
maternal
UTI
and
antibiotic use
during
pregnancy as the cause of the injury.
157.
This is in
contrast with the neonatologists who attributed the injury
to
intrapartum
hypoxia
.
158.
She
maintains that C[...]’s
clinical
presentation and treatment
were
reasonable
and appropriate
.
The
brain
injury
was
likely due to
poor
circulation
,
possibly linked to
infection-related
hypoxia/sepsis
.
159.
She was
testifying as a
factual
witness
,
not offering expert conclusions on
obstetrics
or causation
.
160.
Mr Uys
questioned her
neutrality
,
citing her employment at the
defendant
hospital
.
Mr Soni
clarified that her evidence was
limited
to factual testimony
,
not expert opinion. As a result, portions of her evidence
that
exceeded
her factual witness role
was disallowed especially any
speculative
medical conclusions
.
161.
Prof.
Cooper
stated that C[...] presented with
secondary
apnoea at birth
,
suggesting a significant hypoxic event occurred
before
or during delivery
.
He
agreed that feeding issues can signal
mild
neonatal encephalopathy
,
although other signs (e.g., jitteriness, hyper alertness) were
not
observed initially
.
Thus, while feeding concerns were noted,
clinical
evidence of encephalopathy was limited
in
the early period.
162.
Prof.
Cooper explained that
elevated
respiratory rates
and
heart
rates just under 100 bpm
can
be considered
normal
in term infants
,
especially when other vital signs are stable. These signs alone
did
not
justify intensive investigation
unless
accompanied by additional symptoms.
163.
He noted
that ideally, newborns should be
monitored
hourly for 6–12 hours post-resuscitation
for
signs of encephalopathy. In C[...]’s case observations
were
intermittent
,
not hourly. A
doctor
assessed her after 13 hours
,
finding
no
signs of encephalopathy
.
Prof.
Cooper stated that the
lack
of neurological deterioration
supported
a
reasonable
discharge decision
.
164.
He stated
that the
timing
of the injury
,
whether
pre-labour,
intrapartum, or postnatal
—
could
not be definitively established
from
available evidence.
165.
With
regard to the laboratory findings he pointed out that
elevated
CRP
and
the presence of
band
cells
in
the
FBC
indicated
inflammation
.
He
agreed with Prof. Smith that such markers
cannot
differentiate
between
inflammation cause by
infection
or
hypoxic
injury
.
166.
Although
Prof. Cooper initially
dismissed
postnatal injury
as
a cause, he conceded that that a note regarding
"
bradycardia"
had
been
misread
(not
"severe bradycardia"), and he
conceded
that the records did not support postnatal hypoxia
.
167.
He raised
the
possibility
of
a
pre-labour
injury
,
possibly triggered by
undisclosed
traditional medicines
causing
uterine contractions or foetal stress. He also
acknowledged
intrapartum
injury
due
to
repetitive
hypoxic episodes
as
a possibility, but
not
a probability
based
on the evidence. Prof. C
ooper
did not agree with
UTI
as a primary cause
of
septicaemia but agreed it could have been a
contributing
factor
.
168.
Prof.
Cooper said at discharge, the baby
did
not display signs of moderate encephalopathy
,
which would be
easily
recognizable
,
even by non-specialists.
169.
Upon
readmission
,
C[...] had
clear
signs of moderate encephalopathy
(e.g.,
decreased consciousness, seizures).
170.
He
acknowledged that
if
these signs were present but missed
,
then
discharge
would have been inappropriate
.
171.
Dr.
Mogashoa
participated in
two
joint expert minutes
with
the plaintiff’s paediatric neurologist, Dr. Pearce. Her
evidence largely followed the
criteria
outlined by ACOG
(
American
College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) for
assessing
intrapartum
hypoxia
as
a potential cause of
neonatal
encephalopathy and cerebral palsy
.
172.
Both
experts agreed that C[...] exhibited
Grade
2 neonatal encephalopathy
,
indicative of
moderate
hypoxic-ischemic injury
.
C[...]
met
several
ACOG criteria
for
considering intrapartum hypoxia as part of the causal pathway to
cerebral palsy.
173.
They
evaluated the case using the
ACOG’s
essential criteri
a
for
intrapartum hypoxia:
1.
Apgar
Scores
:
o
Documented Apgar scores were 4 at 1 min,
6 at 5 min, and 9 at 10 min.
o
Dr.
Mogashoa emphasized that Apgar scores are
subjective
and
must be interpreted cautiously.
2.
Umbilical
Cord pH
:
o
No umbilical cord blood gas was
available.
o
Dr. Mogashoa acknowledged that such data
would help confirm intrapartum hypoxia but recognized its
unavailability at district hospitals.
3.
Neuroimaging
(MRI and Cranial Ultrasound)
:
o
MRI
showed a
PBGT
pattern
(perirolandic,
basal ganglia, and thalami) associated with acute profound injury.
o
Cranial ultrasound performed early in
life was normal.
o
Dr.
Mogashoa deferred to the radiologist, Prof. Lotz, and noted that
MRI
findings do not rule out infection
because
inflammation is not typically visible 10 years later.
4.
Multisystem
Involvement
:
o
C[...] had documented
renal
dysfunction
,
haematological
abnormalities
,
and
n
eurological
signs
.
o
These
findings were consistent with
systemic
hypoxia
.
5.
Timing
and Type of Brain Injury
:
o
No
definitive indication of whether injury occurred
antenatally,
intrapartum, or postnatally
.
o
Dr. Mogashoa reiterated ACOG’s
view that injury can occur at multiple stages—before, during,
or after birth.
6.
Exclusion
of Other Causes
:
o
Dr. Pearce excluded other causes based
on available data.
o
Dr.
M disagreed, asserting that
infection
(particularly UTI)
was
not excluded and may have contributed to hypoxia.
7.
Outcome:
Cerebral Palsy Type
:
o
CP
was diagnosed with
mixed-type
cerebral palsy
,
predominantly
dyskinetic
—a
pattern
consistent
with intrapartum injury
per
ACOG.
174.
In a second
joint minute Dr.. Mogashua consistently highlighted the possible role
of
infection
(UTI or systemic)
in
priming
the foetus
,
leading to increased susceptibility to hypoxic injury. She
acknowledged that there were no definitive culture results were
available.
The
CSF
findings
(via
lumbar puncture) were
inconclusive
due
to a
bloody
tap
.
175.
Under
Cross examination she
conceded
that
for a
postnatal
cause
of PBGT injury to be plausible,
severe
circulatory collapse with resuscitation lasting over 10 minutes
would
be required.
176.
Dr..
Mogashua agreed that
intrapartum
hypoxia occurred
,
but
contended
that infection contributed to or caused it
,
aligning her interpretation with the
broader
multi-factorial approach recommended by ACOG
.
177.
While
agreeing that many ACOG criteria were met, she
stopped
short of concluding that intrapartum hypoxia was the sole cause
of
the injury.
The
defendant’s factual witnesses
178.
Dr. Sibeko testified that she was the attending doctor at the time of
C[...]’s birth. She was called to assess
the newborn because
the baby was not breathing adequately and required suctioning and
supplemental oxygen. Upon attending, Dr.
Sibeko recorded that the
neonate was "still under resuscitation with oxygen."
179.
She confirmed that she did not issue any instruction to discontinue
oxygen support. She assumed the baby remained on
oxygen when
transferred to the ward, in line with her contemporaneous note.
180.
During her evidence, Dr. Sibeko reviewed the clinical notes, Apgar
scores, and nursing documentation. She had no independent
recollection of the event
181.
Under cross-examination Dr. Sibeko agreed that normal reflexes would
typically correlate with an Apgar score of 9 or
10; that entries
noting "colour pink" and "suctioned" appeared to
be recorded after 10 minutes of life.
182.
Her own clinical note indicated that the neonate was still receiving
oxygen when she assessed her. She confirmed that
stopping oxygen
support must be based on a doctor’s instruction and he had
given no such order. The neonate was transferred
to the ward while
still on oxygen.
183.
Sister Harriet is
qualified nurse and midwife who was employed
at the hospital in March 2008. She is currently working in Saudi
Arabia. She has no
independent recollection of the child’s
birth or related events.
184.
Her name appears in hospital records as assisting with the delivery,
while another sister is recorded as the delivering
midwife. She
confirmed her involvement based solely on documentation, not personal
memory. She denied authoring several entries
in the clinical file
that are attributed to her or mention her name.
185.
A form titled “Examination of the Neonate” lists Sister
Harriet as the examiner. She denied completing or
writing this form
and confirmed that the handwriting was not hers. She explained that
nursing protocol requires the individual
who conducts an examination
to personally document all findings, positive and negative.
186.
She acknowledged that if she did not complete the form, it must have
been completed after the fact, raising concerns
about the form’s
reliability and accuracy.
187.
Sister Harriet stated that the use of fundal pressure during delivery
is not accepted midwifery practice and should not
have been
performed. She emphasized that all care actions must be properly
documented at the time they occur. Only one midwife
should perform
and record each neonatal assessment; duplicate or retrospective
entries are not standard practice. Therefore, if
the neonatal
examination form was not completed by her contemporaneously, it casts
doubt on the accuracy of the recorded findings.
Assessment
of the factual witnesses: the plaintiff
188.
Mrs V[...] W[...] provided a coherent
account of a traumatic experience that occurred 16 years ago. She
consistently narrated key
facts, such as the timeline of her
pregnancy, the hospital admission, and the subsequent readmission of
her C[...], which supports
her overall credibility. Her detailed
recollection of C[...]’s physical condition (clenched fists and
‘pawpaw’
shaped head), and her own emotional responses,
lends a degree of authenticity to her account.
189.
Notwithstanding the above, her testimony is
marked by several instances of uncertainty. Under cross-examination,
she frequently
admitted to an inability to recall specific details
(such as exact times, procedural specifics, and certain entries in
the hospital
records), which she attributed to the passage of time
and the stressful nature of the events.
190.
These inconsistencies and discrepancies
were highlighted by Mr Soni to challenge the reliability of her
evidence. However, her emotional
responses, including moments when
she became visibly upset and required time to compose herself,
indicate that the events had a
lasting impact. In fairness to her, Mr
Soni’s description of a medical procedure called an episiotomy
was incorrectly described
as suturing a “tear in the uterus”
instead of the perineum. This may have been confusing.
191.
Mrs v[...] W[...]’s demeanor during
her testimony was characterised by a lack of sophistication and an
apparent simplicity.
She presented herself in a straightforward and
unadorned manner, which may reflect her limited familiarity with
legal and technical
terminology. Her responses were candid but
occasionally marked by a hesitancy that suggested a less polished
articulation of her
experiences, and it appeared to be delivered in a
manner consistent with a layperson recounting a traumatic personal
event.
192.
I
am mindful of the fact that she was a single witness, and that the
courts have warned “that the evidence of a single witness
to a
fact, there being nothing to throw discredit thereon, cannot be
disregarded. Moreover, no matter how serious the allegations
might
be, the onus of proving facts in a civil case is discharge on the
preponderance of probabilities and not on any higher standard.”
[6]
193.
It was also
stated by the Supreme Court of Appeal in
Petersen
and Another v Minister of Safety & Security,
[7]
that
not
every error made by a witness or inconsistency will affect his
credibility. Various considerations are highlighted in that case,
such as whether a contradiction is an honest mistake, material, and
advances or prejudices a party’s case, or whether it
results
from erroneous observation in a confused situation, or can be
attributed to defective recollection. Ultimately, ‘in
each
case, the trier of fact must make an evaluation; taking into account
such matters as the nature of the contradictions, their
number and
importance, and their bearing on other parts of the witness’s
evidence.’
[8]
194.
Mrs V[...] W[...]’s straightforward
narrative and emotive responses suggest she is earnest in her
testimony, even though inconsistencies
were noted. However, these
inconsistencies are not material and could be attributed in part to
the fact that the birth happened
16 years ago.
195.
On the probabilities, many key aspects of
Mrs v[...] W[...]’s testimony appear highly plausible and are
corroborated by independent
evidence and hospital records. I
therefore accept her evidence as truthful.
Assessment
of the defendant’s factual witnesses
196.
The hospital staff, understandably, do not remember the event. The
lack of independent recollection by factual witnesses
reduces the
probative value of their evidence.
The law
197.
It
is trite that the criterion adopted by our law to establish whether a
person acted negligently is the objective standard of the
reasonable
person, the
bonus
paterfamilias.
The
test for determining negligence was laid down
in
the seminal judgment of Holmes JA in
Kruger
v Coetzee
[9]
and
stated as follows;
i) Whether a
reasonable person (in this case, a reasonable midwife or doctor) in
the position of the defendant would foresee
the reasonable
possibility of harm occurring;
ii) And, if so,
whether they would take reasonable steps to guard against such
occurrence;
iii) And whether
the defendant failed to take those steps.
198.
In
the case of an expert, the requisite standard is articulated by
Molemela JP in the minority judgment in
HAL
obo ML v MEC
[10]
as follows; “the yardstick by which the conduct of healthcare
professionals is gauged, … is a notional standard set
by a
reasonable healthcare professional with their experience and
qualification in their circumstances. Thus, the question is whether
healthcare professionals in the position of the hospital staff would
have foreseen the reasonable possibility of their conduct
causing
harm and, if so, whether they would have taken steps to guard against
that harm”.
199.
In the
context of healthcare, and especially obstetrics, this standard must
be applied with the nuance recognised in
Michael
v Linksfield Clinic (Pty) Ltd
[11]
.
Having regard to the evidence of expert witnesses, the court must
assess not whether the conduct aligned with best practice or
guidelines, but whether it deviated so materially from accepted
professional norms that no reasonable practitioner would have acted
similarly.
Was
the harm to C[...] reasonably foreseeable?
200.
The clinical timeline shows prolonged labour with documented signs of
foetal distress, including non-reassuring CTG patterns
with late
decelerations from 14h30 onwards. These were not followed by
escalation or continuous monitoring.
201.
Expert evidence from Professors Nolte and Theron establishes that the
2007 Maternity Guidelines were not followed in
material respects.
While deviation from a guideline is not per se negligence, in this
case, such deviation coincided with recognised
clinical indicators
warranting urgent review or escalation.
202.
The failure to act on key indicators (e.g., crossing the partogram's
alert line at 13h30 and the action line at 19h00,
and foetal distress
at 14h30) constitutes a breach of the duty of care. No steps were
taken to summon a doctor or reassess the
foetus timeously.
203.
The midwives had access to clear clinical tools (CTG, partogram) to
foresee the potential for hypoxic injury. The foreseeability
threshold is not of certainty, but of reasonable possibility.
204.
Accordingly, a reasonable midwife in the
position of the defendant’s healthcare professionals would have
conducted proper
monitoring,
at
the very least by further CTGs on a continuous basis,
and would have detected the signs of foetal
distress, and therefore would have reasonably foreseen the
possibility of harm to the
foetus.
Would a
reasonable midwife have taken steps to guard against such harm?
205.
Once foetal distress is identified, standard practice is urgent
reassessment and, if necessary, surgical delivery. This
action was
not taken.
Did
the defendant fail to take such steps?
206.
The midwives did not alert the doctor at several critical stages.
These lapses prevented timely reassessment and intervention.
A
reasonable healthcare professional in the defendants’ position
would have taken definitive steps—escalation, continuous
monitoring, and timely intervention—to avert foetal compromise.
The midwives failed to take those steps.
207.
I am satisfied that, on the probabilities, the healthcare
professionals were negligent. What remains is to determine
the nexus
between the negligent conduct of the midwives and C[...]’s
brain injury.
Did
the negligence of the healthcare professionals cause C[...]’s
injury?
208.
It is
well-established that causation has two elements, namely: (i) the
factual issue, the answer to which can be determined by
applying the
‘but for’ test; and (ii) legal causation, which answers
the question whether the wrongful act is linked
sufficiently closely
to the harm suffered; if the harm is too remote, then there is no
liability.
[12]
209.
In various
judgments, the SCA has cautioned against a rigid application of the
‘but-for’ test
[13]
stating that it does not require “the precision of mathematics,
pure science or philosophy; instead, it requires the invocation
of
common sense, where things are viewed against the backdrop of
everyday life experiences.”
[14]
210.
Similarly,
in
Minister
of Safety and Security v
Van
Duivenboden
[15]
it observed that a
determination of a causal link was not an exercise in metaphysics;
rather, it ought to be based on the evidence
adduced and what can
happen in the ordinary course of human affairs. Therefore, the
appellant did not need to prove the causal
link with certainty but
only needed to establish that the wrongful conduct of the hospital
staff was the probable cause of the
loss.
The
factual issue
211.
In determining factual causation in this case the test is: “
but-for”
the failure to escalate care, would the injury likely have been
avoided?
212.
Expert testimony from Dr. O'Hagan and Prof. Smith supports the
conclusion that the brain injury is consistent with a
partial
prolonged hypoxic event, which is preventable through timely
intervention. Although imaging alone cannot pinpoint timing,
clinical
signs strongly correlate with intrapartum injury.
213.
The injury's timing is narrowed to the intrapartum period through
consistent findings from multiple experts (Nolte, Theron,
O'Hagan,
Smith, Pierce).
214.
Prof. Cooper’s evidence suggesting uncertainty does not
establish a competing probable cause. At best, it raises
a
speculative possibility, which is insufficient to disturb the balance
of probabilities standard.
215.
Dr. Weinstein and Prof. Smuts proposed alternate theories (e.g.,
infection and postnatal factors), but these were not
supported by
reliable contemporaneous data or pathology reports. Notably, Prof.
Smuts conceded the absence of documentation, weakening
the infection
hypothesis.
216.
Thus, on a holistic view of the evidence, the negligent monitoring
and failure to act on foetal distress was more likely
than not a
factual cause of C[...]’s brain injury.
Legal
causation
217.
In
Lee
v Minister for Correctional Services
[16]
the
Constitutional Court held that in the case of systemic omission, it
is sufficient for a claimant to prove that the negligent
omission materially increased the risk of harm occurring. Even
if I were to accept that the precise
but-for
nexus
is uncertain due to overlapping factors, the cumulative failure to
monitor, record, and escalate during labour increased
the risk of an
otherwise preventable intrapartum brain injury.
218.
The evidence canvassed in the aforegoing paragraphs permits a
finding that the inadequate monitoring during Mrs v[...] W[...]’
prolonged labour, and
the
repeated partial
hypoxic events led to C[...] suffering a partial prolonged type of
brain injury, culminating in cerebral palsy.
This is the more
probable version.
219.
In the result, causative negligence has been proven on a balance of
probabilities, thus rendering the respondent vicariously
liable for
damages.
Conclusion and
relief
220.
The conspectus of evidence, taken together, demonstrates multiple
breaches of established obstetric and neonatal protocols.
221.
These
failures collectively amount to
substandard
care
,
which plausibly contributed to C[...]’s adverse neurological
outcome.
222.
Accordingly, all the evidence canvassed suffices to prove all
the elements of delictual liability on a balance of probabilities.
I am satisfied that the plaintiff succeeded
in discharging the onus of proof.
223.
In these circumstances, I intend issuing an order
declaring that the MEC is liable for 100% of C[...]’s proven or
agreed damages
arising from her brain injury.
224.
As regards costs, the general rule is that the
successful party should be given his costs, and this rule should not
be departed
from except where there are good grounds for doing so,
such as misconduct on the part of the successful party or other
exceptional
circumstances.
I can think
of no reason why I should deviate from this general rule and costs
should therefore be awarded against the defendant
in favour of the
plaintiff.
ORDER
Accordingly,
I make the following order: -
(1) It
is declared that the defendant is liable for 100% of the damages that
are proven or agreed to be due to the plaintiff
in her capacity as
parent and natural guardian of her minor child arising from her brain
injury.
(2) The
defendant shall pay the plaintiff’s costs of the determination
of this issue relating to his liability, including
the costs of
Counsel.
D MABASA
ACTING JUDGE OF THE
HIGH COURT
JOHANNESBURG
For
the Plaintiff: Adv P Uys
instructed by Edeling Van Niekerk Attorneys.
For
the Defendant: Adv V Soni SC and Adv T Mlambo instructed by
State Attorney South Africa
[1]
0001-6
– 0001-12 Particulars of Claim found on Caselines
[2]
Caselines
0005-296.
[3]
Volpe,
Joseph J., and Terrie E. Inder, editors.
Neurology
of the Newborn
.
7th ed., Elsevier, Jan. 8, 2024. American College of Obstetricians
and Gynecologists. “Neonatal Encephalopathy and Neurologic
Outcome.”
Obstetrics
& Gynecology
,
vol. 123, no. 4, 2014, pp. 896–901. Reaffirmed 2019. Newborn
Brain Society–endorsed Wisnowski et al. article
(2021)
Newborn
Brain Society Guidelines and Publications Committee, et al.
“Neuroimaging in the Term Newborn with Neonatal
Encephalopathy.”
Seminars
in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine
,
vol. 26, no. 5, Oct. 2021, Article 101304,
doi:10.1016/j.siny.2021.101304.
[4]
Dr. Joseph Volpe, ‘Cerebral Visual Impairment (CVI): Important
Challenge for Neonatology
https://newbornbrainsociety.org/commentaries-volpes-view/
[5]
Caselines
0006
-32
[6]
HAL
obo MML v MEC for Health, Free State (1021/20190
[2021] ZASCA 149
(22 October) 2021 at para 95 referring to
Da
Mata v Otto NO
1972
(3) SA 858
(A)
at
869C, approving Wigmore
Wigmore
on Evidence
3
ed, vol 7 at 260.
Ley
v Ley's Executors and Others
1951
(3) SA 186
(A)
at
192 – 193.
[7]
Petersen
and Another v Minister of Safety & Security
[2010] 1 All SA 19
(SCA) (Petersen) paras 6-7.
[8]
S
v Oosthuizen
1982 (3) SA 571(T
)
at 576G- H cited with approval in
Petersen
supra n7.
[9]
1966
(2) SA 428
(A) at 430 E-G.
[10]
H A L obo M L v MEC for Health, supra n 6.
[11]
2001 (3) SA 1188 (SCA).
[12]
56
International
Shipping Company (Pty) Ltd v Bentley
1990 (1) SA 680
(A) at 700E-I.
[13]
Hal
supra citing
Mashongwa
v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa
[2015] ZACC 36
;
2016 (3) SA 528
(CC); 2016 (2)BCLR 204 (CC) and the
judgments quoted therein.
[14]
Minister
of Finance and Others v Gore N O
2007
(1) SA 111
(SCA) ;
[2007] 1 All SA 309
(SCA) para 33.
[15]
2002
(6) SA 431 (SCA); [2002] 3 All SA 741 (SCA).
[16]
2013
(2) SA 144
(CC)
,
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
K.M and Another v N.P (077931/2024) [2024] ZAGPJHC 915 (6 September 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 915High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
N.N.K.K v V.W.K (108650/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 896 (2 September 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 896High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
K.M.N v K.A.H (8958/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 191 (21 February 2023)
[2023] ZAGPJHC 191High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
K.L.W v C.S.W (2020/35177) [2025] ZAGPJHC 41 (22 January 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 41High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar
K.M v S.M and Another (A3067/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 498 (17 May 2023)
[2023] ZAGPJHC 498High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)99% similar