Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor

A doctrine or rule of evidence in tort law that permits an inference or presumption that a defendant was negligent in an accident injuring the plaintiff on the basis of circumstantial evidence if the accident was of a kind that does not ordinarily occur in the absence of negligence The general purpose of the doctrine is “things speak for itself or tells his own story”.

The normal rule is-the burden to prove medical negligence of the doctor lies on the plaintiff or the complainant i.e. the patient or his relative or guardian, but in some cases considerable hardship is caused to the plaintiff, as the true cause of the accident or negligence causing damage is not known to him but is solely within the knowledge of the defendant who caused it.

This hardship is sought to be avoided by invoking the principle of “Res Ipsa Loquitor”.

When Does Res Ipsa Loquitur Apply to a Medical Malpractice Case?

In a medical malpractice case, res ipsa loquitur will usually apply if the injured patient proves that:

*the harm ordinarily would not have happened unless someone was negligent

*the harm occurred while the injured party was under the care and control of the health care provider, and

*the injured patient did not contribute to the harm.

Where res ipsa loquitur applies, the jury can presume that the health care provider was negligent without requiring further proof from the injured party. It then falls on the provider to disprove any wrongdoing.

Criteria for application of Res Ipsa Loquitor :

The Doctrine comes in to application :

** On proof of happening an unexplained occurrence.

** The accident would not have happened in the ordinary course of things without the negligence on the part of somebody other than the plaintiff.

** The circumstances point to the negligence in question being that of defendant and not of any other person.

** This is an exception to the rule that the plaintiff to prove the negligence and the defendant to disprove the allegation.

** The circumstances surrounding at the time of accident were exclusively under the control or management of the defendant or his servent.

Ms Sau Madhuri v. Dr. Rajendra (1996) : The patient had undergone caesarean section operation and subsequent X-ray abdomen showed an artery forcep in the abdomen. Doctor was held guilty by applying the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur.

Jaspal Singh v. Post Graduate Institution of Medical Education and Research PGI-Chandigarh (2000) : The blood group of the patient was A+. The patient was transfused B+ blood on two different dates and she expired. It was alleged that the patient expired due to transfusion of wrong group of blood. It was held that there was negligence on the parts of doctors and staff of the hospital. This does not require any evidence to prove negligence and doctor was held guilty by applying the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur.

The State Comission in Andhra Pradesh in Air commodore Satyanarayan v. Prasad Eye institution (1998) refused to invoke the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor. The patient lost his right eye after cataract operation due to bacterial infection. Doctors argument was that he operated many patients on the same day, in the same atmosphere and nobody developed the reported infection and it was due to the negligence of the patient himself and hence doctrine of contributory negligence should be applied. The court upheld the argument and held doctor not guilty of negligence.