Practice question
An unconscious surgical patient suffers an unusual retained-object injury. The court establishes that this kind of event ordinarily does not occur with due care, the injury-producing instrumentality was exclusively controlled by the charged physician, the patient did not contribute, and direct evidence is unavailable and not readily obtainable. Which doctrine may assist?
- A universal rule that all surgical injuries require no evidence.
- Automatic liability of every hospital in the country.
- Res ipsa loquitur, under the stipulated qualified circumstances.
- A rule dispensing with every causal inquiry.
- A rule giving the patient ownership of the equipment.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/apr2025/gr_268308_2025.html — Que v Philippine Heart Center, GR 268308, April 2 2025, MAIN decision: duty, breach, injury, proximate causation, and expert proof.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jan2024/gr_246489_2024.html — Spouses Nuñez v Daz, GR 246489, January 29 2024, main opinion: expert evidence and qualified res ipsa loquitur.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/nov2021/gr_250919_2021.html — Supreme Court GR 250919, November 2021, main opinion: technical standards, defense-expert evidence qualification, and exceptional res ipsa loquitur.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.