Sheng Ling Huo v Orthosports@Novena: Medical Negligence and Informed Consent in Knee Replacement Surgery

Mr. Sheng Ling Huo appealed the High Court's decision dismissing his claim against Orthosports@Novena, Dr. David Paul Bell, and Dr. Ang Kian Chuan for medical negligence and failure to obtain informed consent related to a total knee replacement surgery performed in 2013. The High Court dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence of negligence or failure to obtain informed consent, and ordered costs to the respondents.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal dismissed with costs to be taxed if not agreed.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal regarding medical negligence in a knee replacement surgery. The court dismissed the appeal, finding no negligence or failure to obtain informed consent.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Sheng Ling HuoAppellantIndividualAppeal DismissedLost
Orthosports@NovenaRespondentCorporationAppeal DismissedWon
David Paul BellRespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedWon
Ang Kian ChuanRespondentIndividualAppeal DismissedWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudge of the High CourtYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Edmund KronenburgBraddell Brothers LLP
Lee Kwang ChianMichael Hwang Chambers LLC
Lim MinK&L Gates Straits Law
Charles Lin Ming KhinCharles Lin LLC

4. Facts

  1. Mr. Sheng had a total knee replacement on 19 December 2013.
  2. The surgery was performed by Dr. Bell and Dr. Ang.
  3. The polyethylene liner in the replacement knee module was displaced.
  4. Mr. Sheng declined revision knee replacement surgery.
  5. Mr. Sheng commenced action against the doctors for failure to obtain consent and negligence.
  6. The trial judge dismissed Mr. Sheng's claim in negligence and failure to obtain consent.
  7. Mr. Sheng was offered corrective surgery without cost, which he declined.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Sheng Ling HuovOrthosports@Novena and others, District Court of Appeal No 53 of 2021, [2022] SGHC 163

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Mr. Sheng born
Mr. Sheng retired
Mr. Sheng had a total knee replacement
Mr. Sheng was discharged from the hospital
Mr. Sheng's first post-surgical medical review
Mr. Sheng reviewed by Dr. Ang
Dr. Bell noted Mr. Sheng walking with no difficulties
Mr. Sheng issued a Letter of Demand to the Hospital
Mr. Sheng travelled to Batam for a conference
Examining doctor suspected a displacement of the polyethylene liner
Mr. Sheng had a scan done
Displacement confirmed when examined by Dr. Bell
Private investigator observed Mr. Sheng
Private investigator observed Mr. Sheng
Mr. Sheng commenced action against the plaintiffs
Judgment reserved
Judgment delivered

7. Legal Issues

  1. Medical Negligence
    • Outcome: The court found no evidence of negligence against the defendants.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Failure to obtain informed consent
      • Dislodgement of polyethylene liner
  2. Informed Consent
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendants had adequately informed Mr. Sheng of the risk of dislodgment of the polyethylene liner.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Monetary Damages
  2. Costs of corrective surgery

9. Cause of Actions

  • Negligence
  • Failure to Obtain Informed Consent

10. Practice Areas

  • Medical Malpractice
  • Personal Injury

11. Industries

  • Healthcare

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Chester v AfsharHouse of LordsYes[2005] AC 134United KingdomCited regarding the argument that failure to inform a patient of a risk is sufficient ground to find liability, without proving causation.
Alagappa Subramanian v Chidambaram s/o AlagappaCourt of AppealYes[2003] SGCA 20SingaporeCited for the principle that an appellate court will not reverse findings of fact unless plainly wrong or against the weight of evidence.
Tong Seok May Joanne v Yau Hok Man GordanHigh CourtYes[2013] 2 SLR 18SingaporeCited to show that Chester v Afshar does not represent the law in Singapore.
D’Conceicao Jeanie Doris (administratrix of the estate of Milakov Steven, deceased) v Tong Ming ChuanHigh CourtYes[2011] SGHC 193SingaporeCited to show that Chester v Afshar does not represent the law in Singapore.
Chappel v HartHigh Court of AustraliaYes1998) 195 CLR 232AustraliaCited as a case referenced in Afshar regarding the failure to warn of a possible perforation of the oesophagus in surgery.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
No applicable statutes

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Total Knee Replacement
  • Polyethylene Liner
  • Displacement
  • Informed Consent
  • Medical Negligence
  • Revision Surgery

15.2 Keywords

  • Medical Negligence
  • Informed Consent
  • Knee Replacement
  • Surgery
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Informed consent90
Medical Malpractice85
Negligence75
Personal Injury60
Evidence Law30
Contract Law20

16. Subjects

  • Medical Law
  • Tort Law
  • Civil Procedure