The High Court has delivered a groundbreaking judgment against Aga Khan Hospital, ordering the facility and a consultant gynecologist to jointly pay a woman KSh157.2 million in damages after she lost her cervix without her knowledge or consent during a routine surgery.
The case, which dragged through the corridors of justice for nearly two decades, has set a powerful precedent for medical negligence claims in Kenya.
Justice Alexander Muasya Muteti found that the hospital breached its duty of care by allowing Dr. Rafique Parker to practice despite knowing that he had been disbarred from medical practice in Uganda, and the court also determined that the doctor was grossly negligent in the manner he performed the operation.
The woman, identified in court documents as Naila Qureshi, was admitted to Aga Khan Hospital between September 13 and 16, 2006, for treatment of pelvic endometriosis.
She had consented to the removal of her uterus and ovaries, but during the hysterectomy performed on September 14, 2006, Dr. Parker went far beyond what was agreed. Without obtaining her informed consent, the surgeon removed her cervix, a decision that would permanently alter the course of her life.
During the same procedure, the doctor accidentally damaged her bladder, resulting in a vesico‑vaginal fistula, a debilitating condition that causes continuous leakage of urine.
The court heard that although emergency corrective surgery was carried out on October 4, 2006, the procedure failed to repair the injury, forcing the patient to seek specialized treatment in South Africa, which incurred significant additional expenses.
In her testimony, the woman recounted the profound impact the injuries had on her daily life. She told the court that urine would leak even when she sat on a sofa or any other surface, and the loss of her cervix meant she could no longer satisfy her husband sexually as she had before the operation.
The injuries left her unable to continue working, destroying her earning capacity while she endured years of physical pain and suffering. The court also heard that the situation severely affected her marriage, with both she and her husband suffering loss of consortium and enjoyment of family life.
Justice Muteti ruled that the woman had only consented to the removal of her uterus and ovaries but that the surgeon proceeded to remove her cervix without obtaining her informed consent, violating her rights as a patient.
In a damning finding, Justice Muteti ruled that Aga Khan Hospital had allowed Dr. Parker to practice despite being fully aware of his prior disbarment from medical practice in Uganda.
The hospital was also faulted for failing to provide modern diagnostic equipment, including a flexible cystoscope, which the court said could have enabled doctors to detect the injury much earlier.
While the consultant urologist named as the second defendant was cleared of negligence, the court found both the gynecologist and Aga Khan Hospital jointly and severally liable for the injuries suffered by the patient.
The judge further held that the injuries left the woman unable to continue working and enduring years of suffering while also severely affecting her marriage, with both spouses suffering loss of consortium and enjoyment of family life.
Justice Muteti awarded the couple a total of KSh157,207,524.20, comprising KSh7.2 million in special damages and KSh150 million in general damages.
The breakdown of the general damages includes KSh30 million for the loss of the cervix, KSh40 million for loss of consortium, KSh20 million for loss of earning capacity, KSh10 million for pain and suffering, KSh2 million for loss of amenities, and KSh30 million to the husband for loss of society and services.
The total award, together with interest and costs of the suit, brings to an end a legal battle that lasted nearly two decades and sets a significant precedent for medical negligence claims in Kenya.
This landmark judgment sends a clear message to healthcare providers across the country about the importance of informed consent and institutional accountability, affirming that patients have a right to know exactly what procedures will be performed on their bodies and that hospitals must properly vet their medical staff.
For Naila Qureshi and her husband, the decision represents not just financial redress but a long‑overdue recognition of the immense physical and emotional suffering they endured.
0 Comments