A chiropractor has been cleared of causing permanent disability to a patient who resorted to him for treatment almost 30 years ago after an appeals court found a missing link between the injury and the treatment he was given.
The appeals court ruled that the evidence did not prove that the disability the patient had suffered was a direct result of the chiropractic treatment. It therefore revoked a previous court order that awarded the patient more than €75,000 in damages.
Presided over by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti and judges Giannino Caruana Demajo and Anthony Ellul, the court was ruling on a case filed by Simon Grech against chiropractor Dominic Humphreys following a neck injury suffered while playing squash in February 1994.
Grech told the court that he had attended a chiropractic clinic run by Humphreys to obtain treatment after he suffered the neck injury. Grech claimed that Humphreys had manipulated his neck without taking any X-rays and without consulting any of his medical notes.
As a result, Grech claimed he suffered a 25 per cent permanent disability and even had to undergo spinal surgery overseas.
Patient had to twice undergo surgery
In 2017, the First Hall of the Civil Court said Humphreys had shown lack of professionalism and lack of prudence when he had mobilised Grech’s neck without consulting X-rays and a radiological report. Grech had to twice undergo spinal surgery overseas to correct the damage caused but was still considered as having a permanent disability.
Humphreys appealed the sentence, insisting that none of the medical experts who testified in the case had made a direct link between the disability Grech suffered and the treatment he had given him.
The appeals court upheld this argument, noting there was no expert opinion which contradicted that of the court-appointed expert.
The court noted that Grech had a degree of debility before he went to Humphreys for treatment with X-rays showing there was damage to the neck. He spent a week in hospital and had discharged himself, before seeking treatment at Humphreys.
The court said it had two medical opinions to consider – one stating there was no evidence to link the disability to the treatment provided and another by a medical expert appointed by Grech that chiropractic treatment was contraindicated in the circumstances. However, this expert never said there was a direct link between the two and so the court could not arrive at such a conclusion on its own accord.