On 12 December 2025, the Court of Appeal in Nur Fuziatun binti Mohd Fadzli v Gombak Medical Centre Sdn Bhd & Ors [2025] MLJU 4319 delivered an important judgment recognising systemic negligence and clarifying the roles of Person in Charge (“PIC”) in a private medical facility.
The appellant, a minor, brought an action against a private medical facility (“the first respondent”), the PIC (“the second respondent”), and the treating doctor (“the third respondent”) for medical negligence resulting in cerebral palsy. The High Court dismissed the claim in its entirety, finding no negligence on the part of the third respondent and that causation had not been established. Consequently, the claims against the first and second respondents were also dismissed as academic.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal against the first and second respondents, but dismissed it against the third respondent, affirming no negligence in the third respondent’s diagnosis or delivery. The Court held that the first and second respondents owed and breached direct duties of care, including a common law duty to provide timely access to specialist neo-natal care, by failing to have a paediatrician available and causing an unacceptable transfer delay.
The Court further held that the High Court erred on causation, as the evidence demonstrated that the appellant’s condition was not congenital but acquired at birth and was materially contributed to by the first and second respondents’ breaches.
This decision confirms that private hospitals and their PICs may be held directly liable in medical negligence cases even without direct clinical involvement with patients. It clarifies the scope of the PIC’s statutory and common law duties under the Private Healthcare Facilities and Services Act 1998, expanding accountability beyond vicarious liability.
Significantly, it underscores that hospitals and PICs bear proactive operational responsibilities, rather than symbolic oversight, and that systemic failures may attract liability despite that the treating doctor being found not negligent.
Contact us for more information on dispute resolution matters.
