guaranteed by the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Namibia. It is not disputed that the HIV status of all three plaintiffs are HIV positive. [3] The first claim is pleaded by the plaintiffs in similar terms and it is necessary only to refer to the first plaintiff’s particulars of claim. The first plaintiff’s particulars of claim reads, inter alia, as follows: “3. On or about 13 June 2005 and at Oshakati State Hospital, Oshakati, the plaintiff was wrongfully and intentionally assaulted, alternatively wrongfully and negligently caused harm in that she was subjected to a sterilization procedure, alternatively a sterilization procedure without her consent, by employees of the defendant, which caused her injury. 4. In the alternative to paragraph 3 supra, 4.1 At all relevant times the employees of the defendant referred to in paragraph 3 supra, had a duty of care to: 4.1.1 Execute their duties without negligence; 4.1.2 Not subject plaintiff to a sterilisation procedure, alternatively a sterilisation procedure without her consent and without explaining to her the concomitant or resultant risks and consequences flowing from, or incidental to, a sterilisation procedure; 4.1.3 Take all reasonable steps to safeguard the plaintiff from being injured or from any loss or damages being occasioned to her; 3 4.1.4 Would take due and proper care of the plaintiff after her admission to, and at all relevant times whilst being a patient at, the Oshakati State Hopsital, Windhoek. 4.2 On or about 13 June 2005 and at the Oshakati State Hospital, Windhoek, plaintiff was subjected to a sterilisation procedure; 4.3 The aforesaid sterilisation procedure constituted, or resulted, from a wrongful and negligent breach of one or more or all of the duties of care set out in paragraph 4.1 above, which defendant as well as defendant’s aforementioned employees at all relevant times had to and in respect of the plaintiff; 4.4 As consequence of the negligent breach of duty of care as aforementioned, plaintiff suffered injuries. 5. At all relevant times hereto, the aforementioned employees of the defendant acted within the course and scope of their employment with the Ministry of Health and Social Services and with the defendant, alternatively within the ambit of the risk created by such employment. The names and further particulars of such employees are unknown to plaintiff, save to state that they at all material times were personnel employed at, or attached to, the Oshakati State Hospital, Oshakati, Namibia. CLAIM 1 6. As a result of the aforesaid sterilisation procedure and the conduct of defendant’s employees referred to in paragraph 3, alternatively 4 supra, the