A court has found that a hospital unlawfully detained a mother and her minor child by preventing them from leaving the facility over an unpaid medical bill.
In its judgment, the court held that the hospital’s actions amounted to “constructive detention” and violated the pair’s constitutional right to freedom and security of the person under Article 29(a) of the Constitution.
The judge found that although the hospital’s decision to continue accommodating the mother and child was prompted by the failure to clear the medical bill or agree on a payment plan, restricting their movement until such arrangements were made was unconstitutional.
“The fact that the petitioner and the minor could not leave the hospital at will until an agreement was reached on payment of the medical bill amounted to constructive detention,” the court stated.
The court, however, declined to find violations of other constitutional rights cited by the petitioner, including the right to dignity, freedom of movement and the rights of the child. The judge held that the evidence presented did not meet the constitutional threshold required to sustain those claims.
According to the judgment, the child had been admitted to the hospital in need of urgent medical attention and received the necessary treatment and care. The court further noted that the mother had acknowledged that the child was handled professionally by hospital staff. The judge observed that the continued stay at the hospital after the child’s discharge was not a deliberate attempt to confine them, but arose from the parties’ inability to agree on how the outstanding bill would be settled.
Even so, the court emphasized that the restriction on their departure remained unlawful.
“The constructive detention was a constitutional violation nonetheless,” the court ruled.
The court also found that the hospital continued providing accommodation, meals and medical support to both the mother and child while awaiting payment. It rejected allegations that the facility had imposed an unlawful daily charge of Sh6,000 during the period they remained at the hospital. While finding that the hospital violated their constitutional rights, the court also noted that the mother contributed to the prolonged stay. The judge pointed out that she had failed to comply with an earlier court order directing her to make monthly payments of Sh10,000 towards the outstanding debt.
As a result, the court awarded the mother and child nominal damages of Sh20,000. In determining the award, the judge considered both the constitutional violation and the mother’s failure to honour her payment undertaking in good faith.
The damages will be deducted from the outstanding hospital bill.
Court records showed that the original bill of Sh977,000 had been reduced through payments amounting to Sh55,700, leaving an outstanding balance of about Sh921,000. After deducting the damages awarded by the court, the remaining amount payable stands at Sh901,465.
The hospital’s cross-petition seeking recovery of the unpaid medical expenses was dismissed. The court held that the claim was essentially a contractual debt dispute that should be pursued through ordinary civil proceedings rather than through a constitutional petition.
In view of the public interest issues raised by the case, the court directed that each party bear its own legal costs.
In its final orders, the court declared that the mother and child were unlawfully detained in violation of Article 29(a) of the Constitution, awarded them Sh20,000 in damages, and directed the mother to settle the outstanding medical bill.
