The National Maternity Hospital has secured leave from the High Court to seek a judicial review of the decision of the Minister for Health to have an investigation into the death of Malak Thawley.
In a statement, the hospital said a Section 9 review under the Health Act would, without justification, undermine clinical and public confidence and could be counter-productive in its effect on national maternity services.
Mrs Thawley died in May 2016 during surgery for an ectopic pregnancy.
Earlier this month, the hospital paid damages in the case to her husband Alan, after the matter was settled in the High Court.
Today, the hospital said the particular type of review sought by Minister Simon Harris would be used only when the Minister for Health believes there is a serious risk to patients.
The hospital said this conveys to its staff and patients that the minister believes that emergency surgical practice in the hospital outside "core hours" is unsafe.
Holles Street said that any such belief is not supported by the facts.
It says an alternative approach would be more productive and has suggested an international review.
It said it was with regret it has resorted to the courts.
The hospital said it had from the outset accepted responsibility and acknowledged liability for Mrs Thawley's death.
Lawyers for the hospital told the Court that Minister Harris was acting outside his powers in ordering the HIQA inquiry, in circumstances where three other reports into Mrs Thawley's death had already taken place - one by the hospital, another by the Health Service Executive and an investigation by the coroner.
Paul Gallagher SC said the hospital's own review had resulted in changes being implemented to ensure there was no recurrence of the Thawley tragedy.
And he said these changes had been backed by the HSE, the coroner and HIQA.
Mr Gallagher said a statutory inquiry had to be on foot of a specific concern.
He said the minister's implication that it was because the provision of all hospital services outside core hours was unsafe was an irrational position and outside the minister's powers.
In a sworn document submitted to the court, Master of the NMH Dr Rhona Mahony said the new investigation under Section 9(2) of the 2007 Health Act, would undermine clinical and public confidence, and could be counter productive in its effect on national maternity services.
She said it would have a chilling effect on the ability of clinicians to deliver high risk and emergency care in an already challenging environment at the NMH and nationally.
Dr Mahony said no maternity hospital had a 24/7 consultant presence and emergency obstetric procedures were frequently performed in the absence of a consultant, but she said consultant staff were readily available when called.
She said this was exemplified in the Thawley case when the consultant obstetrician was in theatre within ten minutes of being called, and a consultant anaesthetist within 18 minutes.
She said very rare vascular complication of the severity sustained by Mrs Thawley carried a high rate of mortality even if addressed immediately.
She said the NMH was not opposed to a further investigation but she said the type of inquiry ordered by the minister would have serious implications for the hospital's operations and would affect public confidence.
She said patients could be discouraged from attending hospital, because the Minister believed serious safety risks existed.
The NMH has suggested an independent expert body such as the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the UK should be appointed to conduct a further investigation.
The case is due back in court next month.
