After open reduction of a forearm fracture, a patient is explicitly instructed not to bear weight on the limb for six weeks. He resumes manual labour within ten days, the fixation fails and he sues the orthopaedic surgeon. The doctrine most relevant to apportioning responsibility here is:
- A Novus actus interveniens
- B Contributory negligence ✓
- C Corporate negligence
- D Doctrine of common employment
Explanation
Contributory negligence denotes want of ordinary care by the injured party himself that contributes to the harm; it reduces the compensation recoverable in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault. Here the patient ignored explicit post-operative instructions, so damages would be apportioned rather than awarded in full against the surgeon. Novus actus interveniens refers to a fresh intervening cause breaking the chain of causation entirely, while the remaining doctrines concern employer and institutional liability, not patient conduct.
Reference: Parikh's Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence, Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 7th ed.
High-yield for: NEET PGINI-CETNExTFMGEUSMLEPLABMRCP
Written and medically reviewed by the StethoPrep medical team.