Medi-Clinic Limited v George Vermeulen

Mr George Vermeulen was admitted to Medi-Clinic Nelspruit Hospital in May 2007 with cerebral malaria and was treated in the ICU while critically ill. During a period of severe haemodynamic instability, he developed a sacral pressure sore which later caused bilateral sciatic nerve injuries, leaving him paralysed and wheelchair-bound. He sued Medi-Clinic Limited, alleging that the hospital’s nursing staff negligently failed to implement adequate pressure care, particularly by not turning him regularly to prevent pressure sores. Medi-Clinic denied negligence, contending that due to his critical condition, extreme obesity, low blood pressure and poor perfusion, turning him would have endangered his life and that the pressure sore was unavoidable. The High Court found Medi-Clinic liable. Medi-Clinic appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal on liability only.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The cross-appeal was dismissed. The High Court’s order was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the plaintiff’s claim with costs.

This case is a leading South African authority on the evaluation of expert evidence in medical negligence claims. It affirms and clarifies the application of the Bolam and Bolitho principles in South African law, stressing that courts must assess the logical basis of expert opinions and the weighing of risks and benefits, rather than simply preferring one expert view over another. It reinforces that adverse medical outcomes do not in themselves establish negligence.