Nur Fuziatun binti Mohd Fadzli v Gombak Medical Centre Sdn Bhd & Ors

Appellant(s): Xxxx

Respondent(s):

• Gombak Medical Centre Sdn. Bhd.
• Dr Noor Fidak Binti Samsudin
• Dr Zana Zalinda Binti S Mohd Ghazali

• YAA Datuk Hajah Azizah binti Haji Nawawi
• YA Dato' Azizul Azmi Bin Adnan
• YA Dato' Faizah Binti Jamaludin

• The appellant, a minor, sued a private medical facility (first respondent) and two doctors (second and third respondents) for medical negligence, alleging brain injury and cerebral palsy arising from her birth.
• The High Court dismissed the entire claim, finding no negligence by the third respondent (attending doctor) and no causation between her actions and the appellant's condition.
• Consequently, the High Court held that the claims against the first and second respondents (hospital and person in charge) also failed, deeming them academic.

• Whether the High Court erred in dismissing claims against the first and second respondents based solely on the third respondent's non-negligence, given independent allegations of systemic negligence.
• Whether the second respondent, as the person in charge of the private healthcare facility, owed a direct tortious duty of care to the appellant, and whether the first and second respondents had a common law duty to ensure timely access to specialist neo-natal care.
• Whether the first and second respondents breached their duty by failing to provide a paediatrician and by delaying transfer to a facility with neo-natal intensive care, and if these breaches materially contributed to the appellant's condition.

• 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 a direct duty 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 found the High Court's causation finding plainly wrong, as evidence (low Apgar score, absence of congenital risk factors, expert consensus) established the appellant's condition was acquired at birth and materially contributed to by the first and second respondents' breaches. The case was remitted for damages assessment.