Res ipsa loquitur translates as “the thing speaks for itself.” In a case where negligence is evident, the principle of res ipsa loquitur applies and the complainant does not have to prove anything as the thing (res) proves itself.

This principle has been explained in the case of Scott v. London & St.  Katherine Docks Co. [reported in (1865) 3 H & C. 596], by Chief Justice Erle: “...where the thing is shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants, and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendants, that the accident arose from want of care”

Some examples where the principle of res ipsa loquitur has been applied in case of medical negligence:

• A patient sustained a burn injury from a high frequency electrical current used for electric coagulation of the blood [See Clarke v. Warboys, The Times, March 18, 1952, CA].

• Gangrene developed in the claimants arm after an intramuscular injection [See Cavan v. Wilcox (1973) 44 D.L.R. (3d) 42]

• After a patient underwent radical mastoidectomy, he suffered partial facial paralysis [See Eady v. Tenderenda (1974) 51 D.L.R. (3d) 79, SCC]

• The defendant could not diagnose a known complication of surgery on the patients hand for Pagets disease [See Rietz v. Bruser (No.2) (1979) 1 W.W.R. 31, Man QB.]

• There was a delay of 50 minutes in obtaining expert obstetric assistance at the birth of twins while the medical evidence indicated that a maximum of no more than 20 minutes should elapse between the birth of the first and the second twin [See Bull v. Devon Area Health Authority (1989), (1993) 4 Med. L.R. 117 at 131.]

• After an operation under general anesthesia, a patient in the recovery ward sustained brain damage caused by hypoxia for a period of four to five minutes [See Coyne v. Wigan Health Authority {1991) 2 Med. L.R. 301, QBD]

• After a routine appendicectomy under general anesthesia, an otherwise fit and healthy girl had a fit and went into a permanent coma [See Lindsey v. Mid-Western Health Board (1993) 2 I.R. 147 at 181]

• A needle broke in the patients buttock while giving an injection [See Brazier v. Ministry of Defence (1965) 1 Ll. Law Rep. 26 at 30]
• A spinal anesthetic became contaminated with disinfectant as a result of the manner in which it was stored leading to paralysis in the patient [See Roe v. Minister of Health (1954) 2 Q.B. 66. See also Brown v. Merton, Sutton and Wandsworth Area Health Authority (1982) 1 All E.R. 650]

• Infection following surgery in a well-staffed hospital went undiagnosed until the patient sustained crippling injury [See Hajgato v. London Health Association (1982) 36 O.R. (2d) 669 at 682]

• An explosion occurred while administering anesthetic to the patient when the technique had often been used without any mishap [Crits v. Sylvester (1956) 1 D.L.R. (2d) 502]
• In PGI Chandigarh v. Jaspal Singh and others, (2009) 7 SCC 330, the Court held that mismatch in blood transfusion causing death of the patient, after 40 days, is a case of medical negligence. 

In such cases, the respondent is required to prove that he has taken care and done his duty to repel the charge of negligence.

Reference: SCI: V. Kishan Rao vs Nikhil Super Speciality Hospital, 8 March, 2010, Author: Ganguly, Bench: G.S. Singhvi, Asok Kumar Ganguly: CIVIL APPEAL NO.2641_ OF 2010, (Arising out of SLP(C) No.15084/2009)