Nyaho Healthcare Limited has been dragged to court by a patient for medical negligence.

The plaintiff, Mrs Jehu-Appiah, in her application accused the facility of allegedly damaging her fallopian tube, which nearly cost her life.

According to her, upon conception, she went to the hospital for ante-natal care and attention.

But at a point, she claimed she had to undergo life-saving surgery at a different health facility due to the “actions and inactions” of the Nyaho hospital.

After the life-saving surgery, she made a formal complaint to Nyaho Healthcare Limited, after which she was promised investigations into the matter and the results communicated to her.

Mrs Jehu-Appiah indicated that efforts to compel the hospital to release the medical documents proved futile, which compelled her to resort to the use of legal means to compel the hospital to release the documents.

The documents include scans, tests, diagnosis, and treatment regarding the care she had received from the medical centre.

Mrs Jehu-Appiah, in her statement, contended that the information that was handed over to her was just a summary and not detailed.

She further argued that the essence of the application was to rely on the documents, which she said contained information that would assist the court in the determination of the substantive suit of medical negligence against the hospital.

In defence, the hospital urged the court to refuse the application on three main grounds.

It argued that the application was not supported by law, adding that the plaintiff had all the information about her visits to the hospital.

Lastly, the hospital maintained that the plaintiff’s application did not identify or disclose any other information, not within her knowledge. Therefore, she was entitled under law to warrant her instant application.

After hearing both sides, the General Jurisdiction Division of the Accra High Court ordered the hospital to release the complete medical records of the plaintiff to her.

Explaining the declaration, Justice Charles Gyamfi Danquah indicated that the healthcare service provider had not in its defence denied possession and custody of the documents, as such, must release the information.

The court also awarded a cost of ¢2,000 against the hospital.

DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.


DISCLAIMER: The Views, Comments, Opinions, Contributions and Statements made by Readers and Contributors on this platform do not necessarily represent the views or policy of Multimedia Group Limited.