A topic close to my (legal) heart, and one upon which I have been known to speak unprompted at some length, is the correct approach to fact-finding where several possible causes, or causal mechanisms, are suggested for the damage under investigation: a common feature of clinical negligence (and, more widely, personal injury) litigation. This raises…
Ropewalk
Clinical Negligence Blog
08 Mar 2023
An interesting case came out of the Bear Garden at the end of February, which may be of interest to clinical negligence practitioners. The judgment in Read v Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 367 (KB) can be read here. Ms Rianna Read developed cauda equina syndrome following a sudden disc prolapse, which led to a critical stenosis of the spinal canal. On her case, avoidable delays in her…
16 Mar 2022
In complex clinical negligence cases involving substantial damages and an uncertain prognosis, there is often an urgency on the part of claimants to access funds so as to procure immediate needs such as; treatment, care and suitable accommodation. There are two hurdles to that end goal, however: establishing liability, and the sheer length of time…
For many years we have acted in cases across the spectrum of clinical negligence litigation, ranging from smaller claims arising from dental treatment and minor cosmetic surgery to the most serious cases of birth and catastrophic injury and fatality. The depth of experience in our Clinical Negligence Team allows us to meet all levels of requirement.
Our barristers are highly experienced in group and multi-party actions across a range of clinical negligence and product liability claims.
Sadly, some medical errors result in the death of the patient and we are able to provide expertise in advising and representation at inquests and in subsequent civil claims for damages.
To find out more about our Clinical Negligence barristers, click here.
Subscribe for UpdatesRecent Posts
14 Jun 2023
In the case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] AC 1430, the Supreme Court drew a distinction between a doctor’s role when considering possible investigatory or treatment options and, their advisory role in discussing with a patient any risks of injury which may be involved in any recommended treatment and possible alternatives. The former…
11 Oct 2022
The diagnosis and treatment of suspected strokes and transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) is a very broad topic. Depending on the context, determination of the issue of breach of duty is likely to involve consideration of relevant NICE guidance and individual NHS Trust guidelines. It is invariably fact-sensitive and involves detailed expert evidence. Even when breach…
18 Aug 2022
There is a paucity of reported decisions addressing the question of what the applicable standard of care is in cases involving negligent medical treatment carried out outside of the UK. There is considerable authority on the applicable standard of care in cases involving accidents occurring during package holidays to foreign destinations. It is a firmly…
Find barristers with expertise in Clinical Negligence cases
More updates
-
7 April 2022Read more
The NHS in England faces paying out £4.3bn in legal fees to settle outstanding claims of clinical negligence: so reported the BBC in January 2020 following a Freedom of Information Request. Estimates published in 2019 put the total cost of outstanding compensation claims at £83bn; NHS England’s total budget in 2018-19 was £129bn. Over the same…
-
17 February 2022Read more
As lawyers representing parties in clinical negligence cases, we will often encounter scenarios where the injured party has been involved in a road traffic accident or an accident at work and subsequently seeks medical assistance for the purpose of treating their injuries. As a result of negligent medical treatment, the Claimant’s injuries are aggravated, or…
-
11 February 2022Read more
It is often the case, in law, that the person who actually commits a tort lacks the means to meet a judgment or otherwise presents as an undesirable Defendant from a Claimant’s point of view. The law has long recognised the strong policy reasons behind forms of distributive justice, most obviously in the case of…
-
8 February 2022Read more
On 31 January 2022 the Department of Health and Social Care published a consultation document setting out its proposals to introduce mandatory fixed recoverable costs and a new “streamlined” process for lower value clinical negligence claims. The below article sets out the background to, aims of and rationale behind that document before summarising the key…
-
3 February 2022Read more
When you call for an ambulance, you generally want it now. To you, it’s an emergency and an emergency requires an immediate response. The reality of a modern NHS generally and Ambulance Trusts specifically mean that such an expectation is rarely met. Thankfully, in the vast majority of cases the timing of the arrival of…
-
25 January 2022Read more
On 20 January 2022, Hugh Southey QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) handed down judgment in the case of Dalchow v St George’s University NHS Foundation Trust [2022] EWHC 100 (QB). The decision gives rise to some interesting considerations on causation and the judicial assessment of expert evidence, and provides a useful illustration of…
-
18 January 2022Read more
A heavyweight Court of Appeal, comprising the Master of the Rolls, the Vice President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and Nicola Davies LJ has handed down judgment in the conjoined appeals of Paul v Wolverhampton NHS Trust; Polmear v Royal Cornwall Hospital NHS Trust; Purchase v Ahmed [2022] EWCA Civ 12 (referred to, together,…
-
7 December 2021Read more
What approach should the court take when there is a fundamental dispute of fact between an individual’s recollection given in witness evidence and contemporaneous medical records? This was the issue in the trial of HTR v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 3228 (QB), heard by Cotter J between 5 and 7 October 2021.…
-
11 November 2021Read more
In Castello v Gonschior [2021] EWHC 2742 (QB), Lambert J provides an important reminder of the importance of choosing the right experts and an example of the relevance, or lack of relevance, of complaints by other patients, and the evidential principles of “res ipsa loquitur” and Keefe v The Isle of Man Steam Packet Co Ltd [2010]…
-
2 November 2021Read more
Civil practitioners dealing with personal injury claims are generally familiar with the three-year limitation period imposed by section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980. Put simply, claims for personal injury (whether arising from negligence, nuisance or breach of duty) must be brought within three years of the date on which the cause of action accrued…
-
26 October 2021Read more
This blog deals with the causation aspects of Thorley v Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 2604 (QB). Philip Godfrey dealt with the factual background and breach of duty aspects of this case in his recent blog. In short, Soole J preferred the evidence of the Defendant’s expert and dismissed the claim on that basis.…
-
19 October 2021Read more
Having blanked his screen and left the ongoing court proceedings to pick up his son from school, the Claimant’s expert witness in Robinson v (1) Liverpool University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (2) Mercier (County Court at Liverpool, 9 September 2021), Dr Mercier, was initially oblivious of the court’s direction that the Defendant trust would have 21…