Psychologist to pursue 'manganese poisoning' claim
After 12 years, a KZN psychologist has been given the go-ahead to sue mining giant Assmang Ltd for ‘maliciously’ reporting her to the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA).
Linda Holden believes this was an attempt to ‘neutralise’ and cover up her diagnosis that eight workers at the company’s Cato Ridge plant had manganism.
In 2006, notes a TimesLIVE report, 10 Assmang employees were permanently disabled after alleged exposure to high levels of toxic manganese dust. Manganism, a crippling condition similar to Parkinson's disease, is incurable and leaves victims unable to work.
The company claimed that Holden was not competent to make this diagnosis – that this could only be done by a specialist medical practitioner – and reported her to the HPCSA.
But the council absolved her and, in 2012, Holden instituted civil proceedings against the company which, in turn, insisted that her claim had become prescribed, being more than three years old.
While two lower courts agreed with the company, the SCA has ruled that her action was not out of time and that while the report to the council was made in 2008, Holden was correct in her view that prescription only started running once the council had notified her that the complaint had been dismissed.
This occurred in November 2009.
Holden’s attorney Linda Payne said she would be pursuing the claim, notes TimesLIVE.
‘After 12 years and substantial costs incurred, we have finally succeeded in getting off the starting blocks.’
She described Assmang’s opposition as a ‘typical SLAPP (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) suit’ aimed at silencing her.
In her court papers, Holden says Assmang, in laying the charge, had used ‘disinformation’ to ‘set in motion a strategy maliciously designed to intimidate her and to neutralise her from exposing information regarding the patients (referred to her by Assmang) by compelling her to defend herself instead’.
She said the laying of ‘false charges’ was done without reasonable or probable cause and was intended to convey that she had been grossly unprofessional and not fit to practise.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.
