JOHOR BAHRU: A sales manager has taken a pathology laboratory to court, alleging that a prenuptial blood test he did had ascertained his blood group incorrectly, indicating that other findings made could also have been wrong.
In a 2018 test, Tew Chian How, 34, was told that his blood group was “O Rh (D) Positive”.
He was also informed that he suffered from high cholesterol and uric acid levels, forcing him to go on a controlled diet and lifestyle.
Tew claims that this had caused him much anxiety, especially as it was a pre-marital health screening.
“As a result, the plaintiff had to avoid certain foods and miss lunch and dinner meetings with his clients. In addition, he had to undergo health treatments and go on medication and supplements to overcome the problems raised in the findings,” according to the statement of claim sighted by FMT.
Last year, Tew decided to go for another screening at a different diagnostics centre which showed that his blood group was “B Rh (D) Positive”, with all other levels showing up as normal.
“He repeated this test again at the same centre and the results were the same. This shows that the defendant has been negligent in carrying out its duty of care,” the suit filed by law firm Izad Kazran & Co recently claimed.
It added that the laboratory had declined to offer him any compensation for alleged damages despite sending two letters of demand.
In its defence, the diagnostics centre said even if the blood group finding was erroneous, which it denies, it did not in any way adversely affect, convolute or impair the readings of the plaintiff’s blood test results and the uric acid and cholesterol levels in the specimen.
“The centre only provides pathological, clinical and laboratory services, and is not in the business of providing any healthcare services or medical treatments,” the lab said in the defence filed by law firm Viknesh & Yap.
It said all its laboratory facilities and equipment were reasonably fit and proper for the purpose of medical laboratory services, adding that they complied with all requirements and international standards.
“The centre offered the plaintiff on a goodwill basis to test his blood group free of charge before he commenced this suit but he refused outright,” the defence added.
It also said that it was improper to compare the plaintiff’s uric acid and cholesterol levels as four-and-a-half years have elapsed between the two tests and also due to the improvements he made to his lifestyle by quitting smoking and avoiding the consumption of alcohol and fast foods.
“To this extent, the centre says as opposed to claiming that he had allegedly suffered losses or damage, he had benefitted as a result and his health had improved,” the lab said in its defence.
The Muar Sessions Court has set case management for Oct 9.