The Supreme Court of Victoria held that a vaginal examination performed on a labouring woman constituted battery because her consent was not given freely and voluntarily, having been obtained only after the hospital refused admission, pain relief, and notification of her assigned midwife unless she submitted to the examination. The Court also found negligence established on multiple bases, including the hospital's failure to communicate its after-hours policies during antenatal care, failure to call the Mamta midwife without first requiring a vaginal examination, and failure to use alternative means to assess labour progress. Liability was established on both causes of action, with damages assessed for consequential psychiatric injury including reactivation of prior psychological distress, anxiety, flashbacks, and impairment of intimate life, though aggravated damages were not awarded.
The full text is available to signed-in members.