Wakilii

Ernest Katende v Attorney General (Civil Suit 738 of 1989)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 102 · 1992 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for damages arising from alleged medical negligence during hospital operation
Decision
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff with damages and costs awarded

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

Held that the defendant's doctors were negligent in damaging the plaintiff's radial nerve during an operation to remove a metal plate, causing loss of use of his right arm and hand. The court found that any surgeon exercising reasonable skill and care would identify and avoid injuring the radial nerve. Special damages of shs. 20,000/= proved by uncontroverted testimony. General damages of shs. 1,750,000/= awarded for permanent disability assessed at 50%, taking into account the plaintiff's failure to undergo recommended corrective surgery.

Outcome

Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff with damages and costs awarded

Facts

The plaintiff, a National Resistance Army soldier, sustained gunshot wounds and a fractured right humerus in 1985 during military operations. He received treatment at Kitovu Hospital and was later admitted to Suhl Hospital in East Germany where a metal plate was inserted. He regained normal use of his arm and hand. In November 1988, after one and a half years, he was admitted to Mulago Hospital for removal of the metal plate. During the operation on 21 December 1988, conducted by Professor Sseroso, Dr. Robert, Dr. Kobusingye and others, the plaintiff's radial nerve was damaged. Following the operation, he lost all strength and use in his right arm and hand. The discharge form confirmed radial nerve injury during the operation. Professor Ssekabunga examined the plaintiff in November 1989 and assessed his permanent disability at 50%. The plaintiff could no longer perform basic tasks requiring right arm strength and had to employ a servant.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant's servants were negligent in damaging the plaintiff's radial nerve during surgery at Mulago Hospital.
  2. Whether the plaintiff proved special damages of shs. 20,000/= paid for a medical report without a receipt.
  3. What quantum of general damages is appropriate for loss of use of the plaintiff's right arm and hand resulting from medical negligence.

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff.
  • Special damages awarded: shs. 20,000/=
  • General damages awarded: shs. 1,750,000/=
  • Interest on decretal amount at 20% per annum from date of judgment until realisation in full.
  • Defendant to meet the plaintiff's costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Medical Negligence — Standard of Care — Surgical Operations — Duty to Avoid Injury to Identifiable Anatomical Structures
A surgeon conducting an operation owes a duty to exercise reasonable skill and care, including the duty to identify and avoid causing injury to anatomical structures such as nerves that any surgeon would be expected to recognise and protect during the procedure.
Burden of Proof — Medical Negligence — Res Ipsa Loquitur — Absence of Explanation from Defendant
Where a patient enters hospital with a functioning limb and emerges from surgery with nerve damage causing loss of use, and the hospital discharge form confirms injury during the operation, the court may find negligence established on a balance of probabilities in the absence of any explanation from the defendant as to how the injury occurred.
Special Damages — Proof — Documentary Evidence Not Always Necessary
Documentary proof of special damages, such as receipts, is not always necessary where the evidence of expenditure is uncontroverted and the court is satisfied on the evidence that the sum was actually incurred.
Assessment of General Damages — Medical Negligence — Mitigation — Failure to Undergo Recommended Corrective Surgery
In assessing general damages for personal injury resulting from medical negligence, the court must take into account the plaintiff's failure to follow medical advice to undergo recommended corrective surgery that might have remedied part of the disability, even where the potential success of such surgery is uncertain.

Cases cited (3)

  • W.M. Kyambadde v Mpigi District Administration (High Court Bulletin 44 of 1985)
  • Richard Walugembe v Attorney General (High Court Bulletin 122 of 1985)
  • Damba v Uganda Railways Corporation (High Court Bulletin 125 of 1985)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Ernest Katende v Attorney General (Civil Suit 738 of 1989) [1992] UGHC 102 (12 June 1992)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.