Court Allows Paralysis Claim Against Doctor
The Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled that a patient can proceed with a damages claim against her former acupuncturist.
Updated on Oct. 27, 2026 in Stroke
The Supreme Court of Appeal has overturned a previous ruling, allowing Aletta Johanna Barnard to pursue a lawsuit against Dr. Estelle Gouws for alleged negligence. Barnard contends that acupuncture treatment for back pain in 2015 resulted in permanent paralysis.
Why it matters
The court determined that dismissing an untested claim based on technical legal grounds regarding prescription periods could prevent a fair pursuit of justice. This decision ensures that the merits of the case will finally be heard in court.
Aletta Johanna Barnard issued her summons in September 2018, three years after receiving acupuncture treatment for back pain in September 2015. The case now proceeds after a legal challenge regarding the three-year prescription period for claims.
The players
Aletta Johanna Barnard
She is the patient who is seeking damages for permanent neurological damage she claims resulted from medical treatment.
Dr. Estelle Gouws
She is the medical professional who provided acupuncture treatment and is the defendant in the ongoing legal case.
The details
Barnard was admitted to Kimberley Mediclinic in October 2015 with fever, back pain, and paralysis following her treatment, eventually requiring emergency spinal surgery. While Dr. Estelle Gouws denies all allegations of negligence, the High Court will now examine the substance of the claims.
Timeline
23 September 2015: Dr. Estelle Gouws treated Aletta Johanna Barnard for lower back pain.
1 October 2015: Barnard was admitted to Kimberley Mediclinic with paralysis.
September 2018: Barnard issued a legal summons against Gouws.
December 2023: The High Court initially upheld a prescription defense for Gouws.
16 October 2026: The Supreme Court of Appeal overturned the previous prescription ruling.
Health Landscape
This case highlights the complexities of the Prescription Act in South Africa when applied to medical negligence claims. The ruling marks a departure from a rigid interpretation of time limits to ensure that substantive claims can be addressed.
This ruling clarifies the rights of patients to pursue legal recourse for alleged medical negligence even after the standard prescription period has passed. It reinforces the importance of maintaining detailed medical records when undergoing long-term treatment programmes.
The takeaway
Patients who suffer unexpected complications should ensure they document their medical history thoroughly to support potential future claims. Legal experts note that judicial scrutiny of prescription defenses is vital for maintaining accountability in healthcare settings.
What happens next
The case is now set to return to the Pretoria High Court, where a judge will hear the merits of the damages claim brought by Barnard against Gouws.
Further reading
For more information on the impact of neurological injuries, see the Stroke section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Diamond Fields Advertiser.
