Stewart v Ng

Stewart (the appellant) sued Ng (the respondent), a gynaecologist, for negligence. The appellant alleged that a tubal ligation procedure performed by the respondent had been carried out negligently, resulting in a subsequent, unwanted pregnancy. The appellant further contended that the respondent had been negligent in failing to arrange a histological examination of the ligated tubes and in failing to adequately advise her about the procedure and the risk of its failure. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge's findings of fact were erroneous. Specifically, the court was required to determine whether the tubal ligation had been performed correctly, whether the subsequent pregnancy was the result of spontaneous reanastomosis (the natural reconnection of the fallopian tubes), and whether the respondent had been negligent in failing to arrange a histological examination or in failing to provide adequate advice regarding the procedure and its inherent risks.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings. The court reasoned that the evidence did not establish that the tubal ligation had been performed incorrectly. It accepted the trial judge's conclusion that the subsequent pregnancy was likely due to spontaneous reanastomosis, a known, albeit rare, risk associated with tubal ligation procedures. Furthermore, the court found that the respondent had not been negligent in failing to arrange a histological examination, as this was not a standard or necessary step in such procedures. The court also found that the respondent had provided adequate advice to the appellant concerning the procedure and its potential for failure.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.