This article was written by Oladejo Afeezat Oluwatosin, University of Ibadan. This Article Discussion medical negligence is not just a professional or ethical issue but could be a civil wrong, and therefore has legal implications. Gaining an understanding of the legal issues involved is important, both to protect patients and to ensure that doctors are treated fairly.
INTRODUCTION
Healthcare is essential for human survival and patients rely on those in the medical profession to act with adequate skill, care and diligence when providing treatment. When this level of skill is not achieved, an individual may suffer life-changing injury or even lose their life. This neglect can lead to a medico-legal claim for medical negligence.Medical negligence in Nigeria has been gaining grounds in the public consciousness especially in the aftermath of the recent debates on death of patients and liability of hospitals and doctors in the deaths. This has rekindled discussions on the rights of patients and current enforcement agencies and sanctions available to aggrieved persons.
Important legal insight was provided in April 2026 when the Federal High Court, Abuja, held that in appropriate situations, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has the powers to investigate complaints about medical treatment.
Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd v Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission considered issues on consumer protection and regulation of medical professional standards.
This is especially interesting, as medical negligence is not just a professional or ethical issue but could be a civil wrong, and therefore has legal implications. Gaining an understanding of the legal issues involved is important, both to protect patients and so that doctors are fairly treated.
UNDERSTANDING MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE UNDER NIGERIAN LAW
Medical negligence is an act, omission or failure on the part of a medical practitioner or hospital, where a reasonable skill, care and diligence has been breached as a professional in the given circumstances, to the detriment of a patient.Some examples of negligent care are delay in diagnosis, administering a wrong dosage of medication, overlooking the patient, surgical errors, failure to treat patient’s condition, patient’s emergency and undue delay in treatment.
Furthermore, an unwanted medical outcome does not of itself prove negligence. All treatment involves some risk, and complications may result even when the doctor has acted appropriately. There is a legal distinction between an unfortunate result and a negligent breach of the standard of care expected by law.In general, to recover damages for medical negligence, a claimant must prove four fundamental elements: duty of care, breach of duty, causal connection of breach and damage.A duty of care generally exists when a doctor admits a patient for diagnosis or treatment. After the decision to treat is made, the practitioner must exercise reasonable competence, and a breach of duty may occur if there is a falling below that standard of care. The claimant must then show that this breach caused the alleged injury.
The burden of proof usually lies with the party making the complaint (claimant) and the case must be proven on the civil standard of balance of probabilities. Medical records, expert witnesses, prescriptions, and diagnostic reports may be necessary in support of the claim.
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK GOVERNING MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE IN NIGERIA
There are different laws that seem to regulate healthcare and patients’ rights in Nigeria.
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended therefore seems to place a premium on the human dignity of an individual and right to life, respectively. While section 34 subsumes the right to dignity of a human person, Section 33, in respect of its provisions of the Constitution, provides the right to life. However, these do not necessarily automatically constitute civil causes of action whenever treatment goes wrong however, they give an important constitutional context to discuss concerns. The National Health Act 2014 of the act creates the foundations for healthcare regulation. The Act covers healthcare issues, such as Patients’ rights, informed consent, confidentiality, and access to health records. These safeguards underpin the notion that patients are entitled to relevant information and to be involved in decision-making regarding their care.
The practice of medicine and dentistry is governed by the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act through the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN) to which the council relates to also over disciplinary procedure of practitioners that offend the set standards of the practice.In addition, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, governs the protection of consumers and commercial dealings. Consumer protection obligations may be applicable to health care services that are within the jurisdiction of the statute, in addition to the regulation by a professional.
These legal regimes cover various (but possibly overlapping) territories. An appropriate professional regulatory response is concerned with competence and misconduct. A consumer protection approach might be concerned with issues within the scope of consumer protection law, such as the quality and fairness of service. Civil proceedings may also offer a way to compensate the harmed patient.
Recent legal development: The role of FCCPC in healthcare accountability
The resolution by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission against Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd in April 2026 marks a significant progression in the legal handling of health-related grievances. The matter was initiated when the complainant about the healthcare service filed a complaint before the FCCPC. Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre contested the FCCPC’s jurisdiction to look into the complaint, contending that complaints concerning the medical negligence were within the exclusive regulatory domain of the MDCN.
On 15 April 2026, the Federal High Court, Abuja, dismissed the action. The Court held that healthcare providers operating as commercial undertakings are capable of being covered under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018. It delineated professional regulation from consumer protection. The MDCN continued as a professional regulator, but that did not necessarily preclude the FCCPC from exercising statutory powers. This is particularly important in that it accepts that a health care institution could be subject to two different types of accountability. A complaint may concern both a question of professional competence and quality of service or consumer rights.
However, this decision must not be taken to mean that the FCCPC has been granted full power to review any claim of medical negligence. The legal provisions creating the FCCPC, as well as the complaint filed, would limit the FCCPC’s ability to hold practitioners and hospitals liable. Another concern expressed by the Nigerian Medical Association related to the possible duplication of regulatory power after the decision.
Ultimately, accountability in healthcare at the end of the day comes down to getting the right balance between protecting the patients, protecting the professional regulatory processes and conducting effective investigations fairly.
CASE LAWS
1. Donoghue v Stevenson (1932) AC 562
Donoghue v Stevenson, we learnt that the existence of a duty of care is established where it is to be expected that the doing (or not doing) of something by a person would probably (if taken reasonable care) harm the persons that he ought reasonably to have believed (people he ought reasonably to have foreseen would) be likely to be affected by it. For a doctor the reading (should have been able to know) that their conduct was likely to harm their patient.
2. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582
This is the English case in which the rule was introduced that the doctor could not be negligent if he conducted himself in accordance with such a practice as a responsible body of medical men, skilled in the particular branch of medicine concerned, would in his field. The principle also demonstrates that professional standards are relevant when examining medical negligence. Nonetheless, professional opinion is not always the dominant test and the relevant Nigerian statutory tests will need to be examined.
3. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232
The House of Lords in Bolitho held that a court should not adopt a medical opinion simply because a number of responsible clinicians have formed the same view. The opinion also had to be based on a logical analysis.It is of the same principle because medical negligence proceedings are not just about proving that some practice exists, but the court also has to determine if the professional argument behind that practice can be justified.
4. Ojo v Gharoro (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt 987) 173
This Nigerian Supreme Court decision has some practical application to the practice of medicine and medical negligence. It emphasizes the need to look at the circumstances of the acts of the professional when considering whether there is a breach of duty of care.Finally, the case highlights the importance of verifying negligence on the basis of clear law, instead of taking an unfortunate result of treatment as evidence of guilt.
5. Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd V Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (2026)
To the recent Nigerian health system, the decision of
the Federal High Court in this case is thus of very significant importance.
The Court acknowledged that regulating a profession
does not necessarily imply the absence of other forms of regulation by way of consumer protection.
The decision potentially enhances patient access to complaint mechanisms regulated by government
and may impose an obligation on healthcare providers
to take into account the legislative obligation contained in professional and consumer protection legislation.
The precise impact of the judgment will also hinge on
how it is applied in future cases and any additional rounds of appeal.
CONCLUSION
Medical malpractice continues to be an important area of law and public health concern in Nigeria. Patients rely on the healthcare practitioners for effective treatment, honest information and prudent decision making. Where any of these responsibilities is violated and injury occurs, the law offers a portal for redress.
The National Health Act 2014, the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act,
and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 also impact the legal framework of patient protection.
New legal cases, such as the recent ruling in Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd v FCCPC,
show increased attention on consumer protection and healthcare accountability.
However, legal reforms and the existence of courts alone are not enough for enforcement;
hospitals need to keep accurate medical records, conduct proper clinical procedures, effectively interact with patients, and have dependable patient-complaint systems. The medical professionals must also adhere to professional standards and accept patients’ rights. Patients,
on their part, should also be aware of their rights and seek appropriate medical information and
save evidence as early as they have reasonable suspicion of negligence.
In the end, it should be about stopping harm that can be prevented,
making sure that those who have suffered harm do not suffer alone,
and that anyone who caused harm bears the burden and has the evidence to support it,
before the rules are either too simple to be fair or too complicated to be meaningful. That is how human lives will be saved.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)
1. What is medical negligence?
This arises when a person or a health worker does not give a standard of care
that is reasonably expected of them and as a result of the failure, the patient sustains an injury.
2. Are all errors considered to be negligence?
The question: Is there a presumption of negligence where a doctor makes a mistake? The answer: No. There must be proof/establishment beyond reasonable doubt of the elements of negligence as provided by law. The mere fact that there was a mistake or failure in treatment does not constitute negligence.
3. How can a patient prove negligence in Nigeria?
By presenting evidence including but not limited to: records, prescription, reports, testimonies, expert reports and
Any other documents that can establish the injury and the nexus with the negligence.
4. Can a patient sue a hospital for negligence?
Yes. A patient can sue a hospital or a doctor or both depending on the circumstances and the law.
5. What role does the MDCN play in medical negligence cases?
It regulates the dental profession. The MDCN investigates complaints of professional negligence and takes action against erring professionals. The MDCN’s actions are separate from compensation proceedings which are civil matters.
6. Does the FCCPC have the authority to probe negligence?
The Federal High Court in Nigeria in 2026 in the case of Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd v FCCPC ruled
that where the complaint falls within the mandate of FCCPC as the consumer protection agency,
the FCCPC may investigate such a complaint. This does not however mean that the provisions of the MDCN Act do not apply.
7. What should a patient do if medical negligence is suspected?
The patient or next of kin should: seek further treatment if necessary;
present any report or request for records as required by law; and/or consult a lawyer.
