Court overturns award to widow of man who died in hospital

The Supreme Court has overturned an award of £112,429 damages made by the High Court to the widow and family of a Dublin man …

The Supreme Court has overturned an award of £112,429 damages made by the High Court to the widow and family of a Dublin man who died at St James's Hospital 10 years ago.

By a majority of two to one, the three-judge court upheld an appeal by St James's Hospital against the High Court decision of November 2000 which had found the hospital was negligent in its treatment of James Wolfe.

Mr Wolfe's family had claimed there was a failure to diagnose that he was suffering from a stomach tumour and that if this had been discovered, it would probably have been surgically cured.

Mr Wolfe (33), Greenfort Crescent, Quarryvale, Clondalkin, died in the hospital two days after being admitted in early November 1991. The action was taken by his widow, Ms Carol Wolfe (40), a mother of three, on her own behalf and on behalf of members of her family.

READ MORE

Ms Wolfe, while clearly disappointed with yesterday's decision, refused to comment yesterday as she left the court.

The High Court found there had been negligence in the treatment of Mr Wolfe at the hospital in 1989 and again in 1991. It was stated in the High Court that damages had been agreed at £112,429 and following the finding of negligence, judgment for that amount and costs was given in favour of the Wolfe family.

In his judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Fennelly said the cause of death was an extremely rare condition. Mr Wolfe had a tumour called a phaeochromocytoma (phaeo). It was not diagnosed in the hospital when Mr Wolfe attended there either in 1989 or 1991 and was only discovered at post-mortem. If it had been diagnosed, it could have been treated.

Not having been diagnosed, it was fatal. When Mr Wolfe returned to the hospital in November 1991, it was too late.

The High Court judge had found there had been negligence on the part of the hospital, although not on the part of a consultant (against whom proceedings were dismissed), in failing to investigate panic attacks of which Mr Wolfe had complained and specifically failing to conduct appropriate abdominal tests, which would have led to the discovery of the phaeo.

Mr Justice Fennelly said Mr Wolfe had presented with severe stomach pain associated with panic attacks. Not only was the severe stomach pain investigated but a perfectly good explanation was found for it and it was treated with every indication of success.

In those circumstances, he did not think the trial judge had any basis, on the evidence, for concluding that the hospital and another consultant were negligent in failing to carry out abdominal tests to investigate the panic attacks.

He agreed with submissions for the defence that the approach adopted by the High Court went well beyond the standard laid down in the Dunne case.

In the Dunne case some years ago, a former Chief Justice, Mr Justice Finlay, outlined under a number of headings the approach to be adopted by the courts in dealing with allegations of medical negligence.

After dealing with various other aspects of the medical evidence, Mr Justice Fennelly said he would allow the appeal by the hospital. Mr Justice Murray agreed the appeal should be allowed while Mr Justice Geoghegan dismissed the appeal.