November 19, 2025

Medical Negligence under Nigerian Law: What to know

by Ekosolicitors

Introduction To Medical Negligence

Healthcare delivery is a fundamental social service that affects the very core of human existence. In Nigeria, the doctor-patient relationship is founded not only on trust but also on legal duties enforceable by law. When a medical practitioner fails to exercise reasonable skill and care, resulting in injury or death, the law characterizes such conduct as medical negligence.

Medical negligence is not merely a moral wrong it is actionable under tort law, subject to professional discipline, and, in extreme cases, may amount to a criminal offence. Despite the growing awareness of patients’ rights, many Nigerians remain unaware of the legal avenues available to seek redress for negligent medical acts. This Article, therefore, seeks to elucidate the nature of medical negligence, the rights of patients, and the mechanisms for enforcement under Nigerian law.

Conceptual Clarification and Legal Definition of Medical Negligence

Negligence, in general, has been defined by the Supreme Court of Nigeria as

“the omission to do something which a reasonable man guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do” (Ojo v. Gharoro & Ors. .
(2006) 10 NWLR (Pt. 987) 173)

When applied in the medical context, negligence arises where a healthcare provider fails to exercise the degree of care and skill reasonably expected of a competent practitioner in similar circumstances, thereby causing harm to a patient. Thus, the essence of medical negligence lies in the breach of a professional duty of care resulting in injury.

Elements of Medical Negligence

To successfully establish a claim for medical negligence under Nigerian tort law, the claimant must prove the following four elements:

1. Existence of a Duty of Care: Once a doctor–patient relationship is established, a legal duty arises for the doctor to exercise due care in diagnosis, treatment, and advice.

2. Breach of Duty: The claimant must show that the medical professional failed to act in accordance with the accepted standard of care in the medical profession.

3. Causation: The breach must be the proximate cause of the injury suffered.

4. Damages: The claimant must have suffered actual harm, loss, or injury as a result of the breach.

These requirements were clearly laid out in Ojo v. Gharoro, where the Court of Appeal held that liability arises only when all elements co-exist.

Legal Framework Governing Medical Negligence in Nigeria

a. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999, as amended)¹

The Constitution guarantees the right to life (Section 33) and the dignity of the human person (Section 34). Negligent medical conduct that results in loss of life or degrading treatment can therefore implicate these constitutional rights.

b. The Medical and Dental Practitioners Act (Cap M8, LFN 2004)

This Act establishes the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN) and its Disciplinary Tribunal, which regulate professional conduct. Sections 15–23² empower the Council to investigate and discipline practitioners found guilty of infamous conduct in a professional respect.

c. The National Health Act, 2014

The National Health Act (NHA) provides a statutory framework for the Nigerian health system and codifies patients’ rights to quality health care, informed consent, and redress mechanisms.

Section 20³ of the Act mandates health establishments to maintain proper medical records, while Section 26⁴ guarantees the right of every user to complain and seek remedy for substandard care.

d. Tort Law and Common Law Principles

Nigeria’s tort system, inherited from English common law, provides the substantive foundation for medical negligence claims. The courts rely on the Bolam test from Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee⁵, which asks whether the doctor’s conduct conformed with that accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical opinion. However, modern judicial trends incorporate the Bolitho test (Bolitho v. City and Hackney⁶, allowing courts to reject professional opinions not logically defensible.

Recent Cases in Nigeria

In Okonkwo v. Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal⁷ The Supreme Court held that a competent adult has the right to refuse medical treatment, even if such refusal may result in death. The case underscores the legal recognition of patient autonomy and informed consent. Also in Esabunor v. Faweya & Ors⁸ The Supreme Court awarded damages for unauthorized blood transfusion administered to a child contrary to the parents’ wishes. The Court emphasized that consent is a prerequisite for medical procedures, and its absence constitutes an actionable violation of bodily integrity.

In another Case Dr. Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello v. The State (2006), Although more related to professional responsibility, this case reflects the potential for criminal liability when gross negligence in medical practice results in death.

Remedies Available to Victims

Victims of medical negligence in Nigeria have access to multiple remedies under the law:

(a) Civil Remedies

An aggrieved patient may institute an action in tort for damages. The damages may include:

– General damages for pain, suffering, and loss of amenities;

– Special damages for quantifiable expenses such as medical costs and loss of earnings;

– Aggravated or exemplary damages in cases of gross negligence or misconduct.

(b) Professional Remedies

Complaints may be lodged before the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN). The Council’s Disciplinary Tribunal can reprimand, suspend, or strike a practitioner off the register.

(c) Criminal Remedies

In rare cases of gross negligence causing death, the doctor may face criminal prosecution for manslaughter under the Criminal Code according to Sections 303–311 or Sections 220–240 of the Penal Code.

Statutory Limitations and Burden of Proof

Claims in negligence are subject to limitation periods, generally between three (3) and six (6) years, depending on the jurisdiction (see Limitation Law of various States). The burden of proof lies on the claimant, who must establish the negligence on a balance of probabilities. Expert medical testimony is often indispensable to prove the standard of care and causation.

Conclusion

The right to quality healthcare and legal redress in cases of medical negligence is an inseparable component of human dignity and the right to life under the Nigerian Constitution. The National Health Act 2014 and the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act collectively establish a framework for accountability, while judicial precedents reaffirm the sanctity of patient autonomy and informed consent.Ultimately, knowing one’s right is the first step toward enforcement. Patients must recognize that negligence in healthcare is not a fate to be endured but a wrong to be remedied. The Nigerian legal system, though imperfect, provides sufficient grounds for justice where due care is violated.

REFERENCES