Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
6-2026
Abstract
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare may, notwithstanding its potential benefits, result in harm to patients from allegedly negligent acts or omissions by hospitals and medical doctors. In such circumstances, how should the principles in the tort of negligence (duty of care, breach, causation, remoteness of damage, and defences) respond to AI innovations in healthcare? In particular, how may the standard of care expected of hospitals and medical doctors be informed by regulatory guidelines? We refer to case law precedents and regulatory guidelines on the roles and responsibilities of doctors and hospitals as AI implementers. Importantly, they prompt further reflection and consideration as to how regulatory guidelines can impact the application of judge-made principles in negligence in connection with, for example, the reliance on medical AI in clinical practice, the disclosure of AI usage and risks to patients and the challenges posed by the opacity and non-explainability of medical AI.
Keywords
Negligence, AI in healthcare, regulatory guidelines, standard of care, causation of damage
Discipline
Artificial Intelligence and Robotics | Health Information Technology | Medical Jurisprudence
Research Areas
Private Law
Areas of Excellence
Digital transformation
Publication
Medical Law International
Volume
26
Issue
2
First Page
144
Last Page
168
ISSN
0968-5332
Identifier
10.1177/09685332251362405
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Citation
CHAN, Gary K. Y..
AI in healthcare: Regulatory guidelines and judge-made negligence principles for AI implementers. (2026). Medical Law International. 26, (2), 144-168.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4664
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332251362405
Included in
Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Commons, Health Information Technology Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons