Attorneys for Oncology Associates Limited [OAL], the scandal ridden cancer treatment centre that was ordered closed several years ago have filed an appeal against the latest ruling, in a continuation of the saga.
A Supreme Court justice recently backed the decision taken by the Ministry of Health several years ago to shut down the facility after a scathing review about the centre’s oncology practices.
Attorney, Philip “Brave” Davis has filed an appeal in the matter on several grounds, with the main argument being advanced is that the standard of care provided did not fall below the requirements as defined in the agreement between the government and OAL.
The Ministry of Health entered into a contract with OAL in June 1996 to provide radiotherapy services to public patients with cancer at a cost of $450,000 annually.
For years, the Princess Margaret Hospital and the government had referred the cancer patients to Mount Sinai Hospital in Miami, Florida for radiation and chemotherapy treatments.
The cost of these treatments varied per patient from $20,000 to $50,000, but Mount Sinai agreed to provide the treatment at a discounted rate for public patients without insurance.
But the government decided to access treatment at home where possible, hence its arrangement with OAL.
Mr. Davis is also expected to argue that while the Supreme Court judge held that the centre’s standard had to be the same or equivalent to that delivered by Mount Sinai, “this was not part of the agreement entered into with the government.”
Attorneys are also basing their appeal on the argument that the trial judge relied heavily on the report and findings of the American College of Radiology (ACR) charged that the oncology care provided by OAL at its facility in New Providence was an “imminent threat to the safety of the patients, staff and public.”
The Ministry of Health moved to shut down the facility after that critical report which also charged that substandard practice was being carried on at the facility, based on various complaints that ranged from the bedside manners of OAL’s chief of radiology, Dr. Mark Harrison to the treatment of some of the patients.
But attorneys for OAL hold the view that the report never actually recommended that the facility be closed and that the agreement between the government and OAL be terminated.
According to Justice Hartman Longley’s 124-page ruling in the case that was delivered a few weeks ago, it was alleged that there was excessive burning when compared with the treatment previously administered by Mount Sinai.
Such claims were reportedly never “sufficiently” proven during the trial as none of the patients, doctors or ACR representatives ever came forward.
In its defence in court, OAL claimed damages for breach of contract on two grounds: wrongful repudiation and failure to give 90 days notice to remedy the alleged breaches before terminating the contract.
In the end, Justice Longley sided with the Ministry, pointing out in his ruling that because there was an imminent threat to public health, immediate action needed to be taken.
The then Minister of Health, Dr. Ronald Knowles insisted that the reopening of the centre was a matter for the new licensing board, which did not take effect until 2000. It never reopened.
No date has been set for the appeal to be heard.
Health officials have refused to comment on the latest developments because they say the matter is still before the courts.
By: Macushla N. Pinder, The Bahama Journal
