The High Court today dismissed an action for damages brought against the National Maternity Hospital (NMH) by the parents of a stillborn child over some organs being retained by the hospital in 1988.
The organs were removed during a post-mortem on the child that the couple claimed was carried out without their consent and against their wishes.
Mr Justice O'Donovan also awarded costs of the action, estimated at over €200,000, against Mrs Bridget and Mr Terence Devlin but placed a stay on the costs order in the event of an appeal.
Mr Justice O'Donovan agreed with a submission by the NMH that Mrs Devlin had not established all the grounds necessary to sustain an action for damages for nervous shock.
While he accepted that, as result of learning of the retention of the organs of her daughter Laura, Mrs Devlin had suffered post-traumatic stress (PTS), she had not established, as she was required to do, that the PTS was as a result of either Mrs Devlin or another person sustaining a physical injury.
In relation to Mr Terence Devlin, the judge said Mr Devlin had not established that he had suffered as a result of the actions of the hospital.
Mrs Devlin was not in court today when the judge made his ruling. However, Mr Devlin said he was "a bit shocked" at the decision. He and his wife wished to secure legal advice before deciding whether to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, he added.
The Devlins, of Ballyogan Crescent, Carrickmines, Co Dublin, initiated proceedings against the NMH, Holles Street, Dublin, in July 2002.
Their daughter Laura was stillborn at the NMH on May 30th, 1988. The couple claimed the child's organs were removed without their consent during a post-mortem.
The hospital had disputed the claim and argued that there were no consent forms in 1988. It also pleaded that Mrs Devlin did consent to the post-mortem.
In his ruling today, the judge stressed he had heard only the case for the Devlins and, for the purposes of the ruling, he must assume the truth of the evidence he had heard. He agreed with the hospital's assertion that the Devlins' claim that the autopsy on Laura was carried out without their consent was statute barred.
However, the judge said, he accepted that the Devlins were unaware of the retention of Laura's organs until informed of that fact in a letter from the NMH in March 2000. In that regard, the claim regarding the retention of organs was not statute barred. However, he would dismiss the action because the Devlins had not established all the grounds necessary to sustain a claim for damages for nervous shock.