The High Court dismissed a woman’s personal injury proceedings against the Health Service Executive (HSE), ruling that the claim was statute barred. The decision followed a trial of a preliminary issue about the limitation period; it did not determine whether the alleged negligence occurred.
The plaintiff’s summons, issued on 17 August 2011, alleged negligence in her care and treatment as an in-patient at University Hospital Galway. She alleged that she suffered injury, loss and damage during the attempted vaginal delivery and subsequent emergency caesarean birth of her third child on 30 December 2008. The HSE contested liability and pleaded that the claim was outside the two-year limitation period, calculated from the plaintiff’s date of knowledge.
The court heard that the plaintiff had previously had an emergency caesarean when delivering her second child and was concerned about the size of her third baby. After going into labour on 29 December 2008, she underwent an attempted vacuum delivery followed by emergency caesarean surgery. She later required surgery to repair a tear in her womb, further surgery the next day, and intensive care. She remained in hospital until 22 January 2009.
After her discharge, she sought answers from hospital staff. She requested her medical records in March 2009 and received them the following month. She met someone from Patient Focus in October 2009, sought the hospital’s internal investigation report in May 2010 and received it in July 2010. She instructed solicitors in October 2010.
The judgment considered the statutory test for when a person first knew, or could reasonably have been expected to know, that a significant injury was attributable to the alleged act or omission. Applying the authorities cited, Mr Justice White held that the plaintiff’s date of knowledge was 22 January 2009, the date she left hospital. He said she had then sufficiently recovered from the trauma of the birth to realise that something serious and untoward had happened.
As the proceedings were issued more than two years after that date, the court found the claim statute barred and dismissed it. The ruling resolved the limitation issue and dismissed the proceedings; the judgment did not decide the underlying negligence allegations.