Professional Conduct: There was no duty on the GMC to draw to the parties’ attention that it was minded to impose a specific kind of sanction and in any event Counsel ought to know that a sanction for breach of a condition to practise might well include suspension. While suspension might affect the health and career of the professional the panel was entitled to place weight on public interest conditions and the reputation of the profession in ensuring that conditions were complied with.
|
The medical negligence claim arising out of a catastrophic brain injury to a two year old child was valued at more than £17,000,000. The Claimant contended that her family had settled in France and that in determining any periodical payments order it was appropriate to have expert evidence of the French earnings index and was allowed to call such evidence despite the fact that it might prove unnecessary. The Defendant disputed the Claimant’s claim that her father would have been likely to earn s ...
|
The practice of a hospital to retrieve a patient’s medical records only if advised by the patient of previous complications in pregnancy was negligent. Although the particular damage was not foreseeable the immediate cause of the Claimant’s condition did not differ in kind from what was foreseeable.
|
Medical: While the original decision not to perform a caesarean was an approach that would have been taken by a reasonable proportion of obstetricians at the time, the decision not to carry out an emergency caesarian thereafter was a breach of duty. That breach had been a material contribution to the intraventricular haemorrhaging suffered by the Claimant.
|
Appeal to the Court of Session under the General Medical Council's Preliminary Proceedings Committee and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1988:- In April 2007, following an eight day hearing, the panel found the appellant guilty of serious professional misconduct:- "The panel has come to the view that your actions as described (attachment 1) bring the profession into disrepute and demonstrate a serious departure (from) the standard of conduct that the public is entitled to expect ...
|
A general practitioner was found to have failed to carry out a medical examination with due care on a patient suffering from symptoms of meningococcal septicaemia. Although the notes of examination recorded symptoms suggestive of a common cold. in light of the corroborating evidence as to the claimant’s symptoms at the time of examination from her relatives, the notes did not represent a complete account of those symptoms.
|
GMC: Fitness to Practice: In September 2003, the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council (GMC) found that a doctor who specialised in the field of gynaecology had committed serious professional misconduct. Conditions were imposed on the doctor's registration for a period of 12 months. On a review of the case in 2004, the committee found that the doctor had failed to comply with the conditions. As a result, the conditions were varied, and ordered to run for a further 12 mont ...
|
The Claimant’s daughter suffered from hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy at birth. The effect was that she could only survive on life support and the outlook was hopeless. Life support was withdrawn the following day. Three years later the NHS Trust admitted liability for the death. The Claimant was awarded damages for psychiatric injury caused through her daughter’s death and the prolonged investigation into that death in the sum of £20,000 and consequential treatment costs as well as bereavement ...
|
The Claimant had a long history of back and urinary difficulties. He consulted his GP after an increase in back pain. After a difficult night an ambulance crew was summoned who believing the Claimant was suffering from sciatica arranged for another GP to attend who also believed there to be a sciatica problem. A second ambulance crew was called out, but did not take the Claimant to hospital. Subsequently it was discovered that the Claimant was suffering from cauda equina syndrome and that the de ...
|
After giving birth the Claimant suffered from a chronic inflammation of tissues in the spine causing severe neurological and physical consequences. At trial it was found that this was caused by a contamination of an anaesthetic used at some stage during the anaesthetic procedure. Although the finding of the judge was that the clinicians involved was that they “normally operated to a very high standard” his conclusion was open to him on the evidence even where its consequence was that on the occa ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 |