The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

ATTORNEY General Wayne Munroe says he does not know why health officials promised not to appeal a ruling that found Princess Margaret Hospital negligent in the death of a newborn girl.

He said rulings are appealed whenever a judge is believed to have got the law wrong.

“I don’t know what would have motivated them to say they were not going to appeal the ruling,” Mr Munroe said yesterday. “Rulings are appealed based on whether they’re good law or not. So, if a judge makes an error, you appeal it to have it corrected.”

His comments came after the Public Hospitals Authority and obstetrician Dr Agatha Foulkes-Mackey filed separate notices of appeal on September 8. The PHA’s appeal was filed through the Office of the Attorney General.

The appeals challenge the July 28 ruling in favour of Widline Guillaume, whose daughter, Elizabeth Lundy, died just over two hours after her birth on August 2, 2022.

The day after the ruling, then-PHA managing director Aubynette Rolle told The Tribune the authority would not prolong the case or force the family to relive the baby’s death. She said the PHA “at this moment has no intentions of going back against the ruling”, including any costs associated with it. Health Minister Dr Michael Darville also indicated at the time that the ruling would not be appealed.

Mr Munroe said every case referred to his office is reviewed to decide whether to fight it in court or settle.

“If it’s determined that we have no case, our policy now is to engage with people to settle them,” he said. “But if we have a case, then we go ahead and have the matter litigated if it can’t be settled.”

He said the Court of Appeal would decide whether the trial judge erred on causation and other matters, noting that Dr Foulkes-Mackey had also appealed.

Acting Justice Raynard Rigby, KC, found that the hospital and Dr Foulkes-Mackey fell below the required standard of care. He ruled that they failed to monitor Ms Guillaume and her baby between 4.10am and 4.37am while she waited for the result of a COVID-19 test before an emergency caesarean section.

The ruling followed a three-day trial in June. The court heard competing expert evidence on whether Elizabeth died from oxygen deprivation or an undetected congenital heart condition.

In its appeal, the PHA argues that the judge failed to establish that the 27-minute monitoring lapse caused the baby’s injury. It also contends that he misapplied the burden of proof and relied on evidence that was not presented at trial.

The authority is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside or vary the judgment, enter judgment for the defendants and order Ms Guillaume to pay its appeal costs.

Dr Foulkes-Mackey is separately challenging the finding against her personally. She argues that the judge did not identify any specific act or omission by her that fell below the required standard of care, and that she was held liable for a monitoring failure attributed to the hospital and the attending midwife. She is asking for the findings against her to be set aside and the claim dismissed or, alternatively, for a new trial before a different judge.

Justice Rigby declared Ms Guillaume entitled to general and special damages, to be assessed at a later hearing, and ordered the defendants to pay her legal costs.

No hearing date has been set for the appeals.