Clinical Medical Negligence

Wright v. Basildon and Thurrock Hospital NHS Trust, QBD, 7/12/11

Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:21:26 GMT

Hospital Trust Granted Summary Judgment In Clinical Negligence Claim Where Claimant Debarred From Relying On New Expert Evidence:-

Judge Stockdale QC (sitting as a deputy High Court judge) granted the Defendant hospital trust summary judgment in respect of all outstanding issues in the underlying clinical negligence claim brought against it. Judgment by consent had been entered in respect of part of the claim, there having been an admission of a breach of duty in a limited sense. Summary judgment was however entered in respect of other discrete serious allegations of breach of duty (including that the surgery had been carried out without consent and was barbaric) on the grounds that they did not have real prospects of success. The original expert in support of the Claimant's case withdrew and pursuant to the terms of a Court Order, the Claimant stood debarred from relying upon new expert evidence as he had failed to obtain such expert evidence by a certain date.

Hussain v. Bradford Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Anor, QBD (Bradford), 10/11/11

Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:50:00 GMT

Coulson J dismissed the claimant's claim for damages against the defendant NHS trust?s alleged negligent treatment of him upon admission into one of its hospitals. Coulson J held that the defendant had negligently failed to diagnose the claimant as having Cauda Equina Syndrome ('CES') and thus did not request an urgent MRI. On the evidence, Coulson J found that had the MRI scan be undertaken at this initial stage, emergency surgery would have been performed some 48 hours earlier than it ultimately was. In the event, that surgery was unsuccessful and the claimant was left with no sensation below the waist. However, based upon the majority expert opinion, Coulson J found that had the surgery been carried out some 48 hours earlier, on a balance of probabilities the claimant's prospects of making a good recovery were less than 50%. In view of the expert evidence that the rapid onset of CES and deterioration in the claimant's condition reduced his prospects of recovery further still, Coulson J held tha t the claimant had failed to establish causation.

Michael Cherney & Ors v. (1) Frank Neuman & Ors (2) Frank Neuman, ChD, 5/8/11

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 08:58:49 GMT

Solicitors' Conduct Of Property Transactions Not Negligent

Henderson J held that the defendant solicitors' firm were not liable to their clients for damages for professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust. The defendant had been instructed by the clamant to act on their behalf in respect of various property transactions. Henderson J held that the general scope of the retainer was to act and provide advice as to the conveyancing and corporate aspects of the potential purchase of the properties which the clients wished to acquire. Henderson J further held that the scope of the retainer did not extend to the provision of advice as to the commercial merits of the transactions or the price to be paid. Had such advice been required, the Defendant would have instructed specialist valuers on their clients' behalf. The defendant's knowledge of side payments to the claimants' agents did not constitute a breach of duty as the claimants had full knowledge of such payments and implicitly approved them.

Doona v. Matha, QBD, 8/7/11

Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:25:22 GMT

Upon the trial of a preliminary issue of fact in a clinical negligence action, Mackay J was required to make preliminary factual findings as to what had occurred during a consultation by the claimant patient with the defendant general practitioner about a growth in his groin, which subsequently transpired to be a malignant melanoma. In determining the preliminary issue of fact, Mackay J found that it was more likely than not the case that the defendant asked the claimant why he was concerned about the growth on his groin and he had responded with words to the effect that it had grown in size, itched and bled and the defendant had thereafter diagnosed it as a sebhorrhoeic wart.

Wright v. Cambridge Medical Group (A Partnership), CA, 9/6/11

Thu, 04 Aug 2011 13:56:44 GMT

The Court of Appeal held that the judge below had erred, both in law and on the facts, to hold that the respondent GP’s negligent delay in referring the appellant patient to hospital, and which hospital had negligently delayed the correct diagnosis of the patient’s condition, had not been causative of the permanent injuries suffered. The Court of Appeal held that the respondent could not escape liability by establishing that the hospital would have negligently treated the patient, even if promptly referred.

Wright v. Cambridge Medical Group (A Partnership) [2011] EWCA Civ 669, 9 June 2011

Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:27:23 GMT

The Court of Appeal held that the judge below had erred, both in law and on the facts, to hold that the respondent GP's negligent delay in referring the appellant patient to hospital, and which hospital had negligently delayed the correct diagnosis of the patient's condition, had not been causative of the permanent injuries suffered. The Court of Appeal held that the respondent could not escape liability by establishing that the hospital would have negligently treated the patient, even if promptly referred.

Amalgamated Metal Corporation Plc v Wragge & Co (A Firm) & Anor [2011] EWHC 887 (Comm) 08/04/2011

Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:05:02 GMT

Assessment Of Damages In Professional Negligence Claim Where Solicitors Exceeded Clients’ Authority In Group Litigation Case

Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13, 29/03/2011

Fri, 06 May 2011 01:33:52 GMT

The Supreme Court held (by a majority) there was no justification (whether as a matter of public policy or otherwise) which justified the continued immunity of an expert evidence from suit in respect of the performance by that expert of his/her duties in court or for the opinions expressed in reports in anticipation of court proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the primary justification for conferring immunity from liability in negligence on expert witnesses, namely an assumption that experts would be dissuaded from providing expert services at all, was not made out, particularly as experts were customarily insured against the risk of suit.

McCoy v East Midlands Strategic Health Authority [2011] EWHC 38 (QB) 18/01/2011

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:07:31 GMT

Obstetrician Not Negligent In Failing To Continue Or Carry Out Further Cardiotocograph

Knott v Leading, [2010] EWHC 1827 (QB), 22/07/2010

Wed, 08 Sep 2010 20:54:58 GMT

GP Had Not Failed To Diagnose Symptoms Of Meningitis

Knott v Leading [2010] EWHC 1827 (QB) (22 July 2010)

Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:02:40 GMT

Davies J held that the defendant GP had not failed in his duty of care by failing to diagnose symptoms of meningitis following an examination of his patient who was subsequently diagnosed with such disease after her admission to hospital the next day. There had been an evidential dispute between the GP and the patient’s parents as to the symptoms with which the patient presented on the day of the examination. Davies J preferred the evidence of the GP that no such symptoms were present on the day of the examination, on the grounds that it was consistent with the conduct of a GP who was alert to the possibility of the patient having meningitis but did not find such symptoms present so as to warrant referral to the hospital and with the progression of the disease generally.

May (A Child) v. Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, [2009] EWHC 3175 (QB), 4/12/09

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:10:56 GMT

NHS Trust Negligently Caused Claimant’s Paraplegia

Jones v. Kaney, [2010] EWHC 61 (QB), 21/1/10

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:09:07 GMT

Professional Negligence Claimant Against Expert Psychologist Raising Defence Of Witness Immunity Struck Out

Carter v. Ministry of Justice, [2010] EWHC 60 (QB), 12/2/10

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:07:27 GMT

Failure To Take Prisoner’s Medical History Upon Consultation Constituted A Breach Of Duty Of Care

Conan Ingram v. Williams, [2010] EWHC 758 (QB), 13/4/10

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:06:25 GMT

GP Not Negligent In Failing To Diagnose Possible Premature Rupture Of Womb Membranes Where Pregnant Woman Had Not Advised Of Incontinence

Buxton v. Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board NHS Trust, [2010] EWHC 1187 (QB), 26/5/10

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:03:10 GMT

Prescription Of Medication With Known Side Effects Not Negligent As Not A Decision Which No Reasonably Competent Ophthalmologist Could Have Made

Baxter & Ors v. McCann, [2010] EWHC 1330 (QB), 10/6/10

Thu, 22 Jul 2010 17:02:04 GMT

GP Not Negligent In Not Identifying Tumour Upon Clinical Examination

Compton v General Medical Council (Admin) 11/11/08

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The failure by a doctor to disclose that he had been refused approval by another strategic health authority when asked to do so in the application form was sufficient grounds to suspend the doctor for one year even where the doctor had been told by one of the panel members who had refused his approval that he need not disclose it on a subsequent application. Although the doctor had not appeared at the panel hearing, it had done everything reasonable to ensure that anything that might assist the doctor was not missed including hearing the evidence of the panel member who have advised non-disclosure. In so doing the legal advisor was not required to give a summary of the evidence to the panel.

Canning-Kishver v Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2008] EWHC 2384 (QB) (13 October 2008)

Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The failure by nurses to summon a doctor despite drastic falls in the heart and respiratory rates of an infant had on the balance of probabilities materially contributed to the cerebral atrophy subsequently suffered.

Birch v University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2008] EWHC 2237 (QB) (29 September 2008)

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The failure by the hospital to not obtain properly the Claimant’s consent to an invasive angiogram by not discussing the alternative imaging methods and their respective comparative risks allowed the Claimant to recover despite the actual performance of the angiogram not being negligent.

Manning v King’s College Hospital NHS Trust (QB) 29/9/08

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 00:00:00 GMT

In 1994 the claimant’s wife was treated with radiotherapy in respect of a rare form of tongue cancer. Over the following years the claimant’s wife was examined and until 2001 all the biopsies were reported as being clear. In 2001 a diagnosis of spindle-cell carcinoma was made. The hospital trust should have identified this on examination in December 1996 when the biopsies were performed and had it done so salvage surgery would have been performed and the claimant’s wife survived. The claimant was entitled to recover damages under the Fatal Accidents Act and damages for his wife’s estate including damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities during her lifetime.

Russell, R (on the application of) v General Medical Council [2008] EWHC 2546 (Admin) (24 July 2008)

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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.

Mealing v Chelsea & Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust [2008] EWHC 1664 (QB) (18 July 2008)

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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 significant sums from a hedge fund he was seeking to set up and sought expert evidence on that point. Although unusual given the size of the claims relating to gratuituous parental care (£350,000) and costs of accomodation (£4,500,000) and the limited disclosure of information relating to the Claimant’s father’s income the Defendant was permitted to rely on such evidence.

Loraine v Wirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2008] EWHC 1565 (QB) (18 July 2008)

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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.

Boustead v North West Strategic Health Authority [2008] EWHC B11 (QB) (16 June 2008)

Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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.

Dr. James Swanney v. The Full Decision of the General Medical Council Fitness to Practice Panel Hearing of 13 April 2007 [2006] CSIH 35

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:29:00 GMT

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 from a medical practitioner. The panel therefore determined that you have been guilty of serious professional misconduct." The appellant appealed and sought reduction of the decision on four grounds:- (1) that at the material time the appellant had not been registered with the respondents and that the matters complained of had occurred in Canada, and the respondents had no jurisdiction over him; (2) that the case should not have been reopened with more serious charges involved and resulted in "double jeopardy"; (3) that the evidence of a witness for the respondents at the hearing should be discarded as she had no experience of the standards or systems operated in medical practice in British Columbia nor did she have any expertise of the two drugs in question; and (4) that there had been no proof of harm consequent on the use of the drug in question. It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that nothing had been proved that demonstrated serious professional misconduct on his part. Here the court considered whether the appeal should be allowed.

Langdon v Williams (QB) 25/4/08

Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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.

Arzhangi, R (on the application of) v General Medical Council [2008] EWHC 815 (Admin) (03 April 2008)

Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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 months. The doctor was required to appear at a hearing before a fitness to practise panel of the GMC. At that hearing, the doctor offered an undertaking that he would not practise medicine until the adverse finding which had been made against him in September 2003 was formally resolved. The panel were of the view among other things that the varied set of conditions and the requirement set out under r 22(h)(i) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules Order of Council 2004, SI 2004/2608, would not be served by the acceptance of the undertaking. On that basis, the panel ordered that the doctor’s registration be suspended from the medical register for 12 months. The doctor appealed against those findings. The appeal was dismissed. In the circumstances, the panel's decision to refuse the doctor's undertaking revealed no error of law and the panel’s decision to impose suspension for a 12 month period was unimpeachable.

Jones v Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust [2008] EWHC 558 (QB) (20 March 2008)

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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 damages and other FAA damages.

Oakes v Neininger & Ors [2008] EWHC 548 (QB) (19 March 2008)

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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 delay in treatment had resulted in permanent difficulties. The first GP was in breach of duty in that having been told that the Claimant was suffering pain in both legs he should have recognised the symptoms of CES. The first ambulance crew’s decision was reasonable in light of the circumstances portrayed to them. However the second GP and ambulance crew should have recognised the symptoms of CES and taken the Claimant to hospital where he could have been operated on.

Sutcliffe v Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust (CA) 11/3/08

Tue, 11 Mar 2008 00:00:00 GMT

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 occasion in question the clinicians or at least one of them had failed to live up to their normal practice.

Telles v South West Strategic Health Authority [2008] EWHC 292 (QB) (26 February 2008)

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The Claimant was diagnosed at birth with pulmonary valve atresia. An infusion was performer to improve the oxygen levels. A further operation was carried out to insert a shunt between the left subclavian artery and the left pulmonary artery thereby passing the closed or near closed pulmonary valve. It was discovered on a subsequent operation to insert a second shunt that the original shunt was too long and had resulted in a kink. This had restricted blood flow. The Claimant suffered from perventricular leukomalacia (damage to the white matter of the brain) caused by lack of oxygen at some point between birth and the second shunt operation. As it was impossible to apportion damages between the damage suffered before and after the first shunt operation, the Claimant was entitled to recover full damages from the hospital.

Lewis v Weston Area Health NHS Trust (QBD) 1/2/08

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 00:00:00 GMT

A hospital breached its duty in failing to carry out a sufficiently thorough examination of a patient and by delaying the diagnosis of anterior compartment syndrome and caused disability.

Akinleye v East Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust [2008] EWHC 68 (QB) (25 January 2008)

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:00:00 GMT

An e-mail from an NHS trust commenting on a doctor’s professionalism and honesty in response to an enquiry from another NHS trust investigating potential patient safety issues was protected by qualified privilege and there was no evidence of malice.

Scott Michael Learmont (AP) as an individual+Ross Michael Learmont as executors of the late Catherine Learmont and Lauren and Ann Learmonth (ap) v. Dr Fiona Vernon [2007] CSOH 204

Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:26:00 GMT

Damages - Medical Negligence – Catherine Learmont died as a result of acute bacterial meningitis, which was the agreed cause of death. In this action, the question was whether a GP had been professionally negligent in her examination of Mrs Learmont. Two questions of primary fact arose:
(1)   What were her signs and symptoms when she consulted GP? and
(2)   What examination of Mrs Learmont did she perform?
Then the question of professional negligence was addressed by a third question:
(3)   What examination of Mrs Learmont would an ordinarily competent general practitioner have performed?
Damages were agreed.

Rhodes-Hampton v Worthing & Southlands Hospital NHS Trust [2007] EWCA Civ 1202 (20 November 2007)

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 00:00:00 GMT

A midwife injured in attempting to restrain a patient could recover against the anaesthetist’s employer for his failure to take proper precautions in failing to arrange for more staff to attend after an earlier assault and to fit cot sides to the bed.

Bailey v The Ministry of Defence & Anor [2007] EWHC 2913 (QB) (07 December 2007)

Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:00:00 GMT

After a gallstone operation the Claimant had not been properly resuscitated. Had she been she would have been fit for corrective procedures. She would not have needed a subsequent operation which caused a tear in her liver or the consequential emergency operation would have been avoided. Both the negligent post-operative care and acute pancreatitis had been a material contribution to the Claimant’s overall weakness which had led to her fatal aspiration of vomit which in turn had caused cardiac arrest and consequent brain damage. There was a sufficient causal link to establish liability.

Colwill v Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals NHS Trust [2007] EWHC 2881 (QB) (06 December 2007)

Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The injuries suffered by the Claimant were caused by an infection associated with the use of a canula during hospital treatment. Although the timing of the decision to insert the canula and the location of its insertion were not best practice they were not negligent. The failure to record the date the canula was inserted and to remove it after its initial use as well as the delay in failing to prescribe antibiotics were causative of the Claimant’s injuries and the trust was found liable.

Flowers v Mallett [2007] EWHC B14 (QB) (30 November 2007)

Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

A dermatologist was not liable for the death of a patient who had been referred for facial lesions and had subsequently dies as a result of a mole on the back of his neck metastasing to other parts of his body. Although the dermatologist had examined the neck and saw the mole its appearance was benign.

Gwynn, R (on the application of) v The General Medical Council [2007] EWHC 3145 (Admin) (28 November 2007)

Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Professional ConductComplaints against the general and vascular surgeon arose in part from procedures carried out more than five years before the complaints. In refusing to stay the disciplinary proceedings the registrar had erred because there were no exceptional circumstances requiring an investigation in the public interest outside the normal time limit. The council had no power to re-open a previously closed complaint. Even if it had the power to re-open a complaint that power had to be exercised fairly and reasonably.

Laura Simms v NHS Tayside – Dundee Sheriff Court, 25 October 2007

Thu, 01 Nov 2007 13:51:00 GMT

Diet of debate - Relevency and Specification - Claim in respect of clinical negligence - Failure to include averments re tests laid down in Hunter v Hanley

The Pursuer raised an action for damages against the Defenders. The Pursuer alleged that midwives involved in her care at the time of the birth of her son had been negligent. At a Diet of Debate the Defenders’ principal criticism of the Pursuer’s pleadings was that they did not contain an appropriate averment that the midwives' course of action was one which no midwife of ordinary skill would have taken if acting with ordinary care. It was accepted by both parties that the test of medical negligence set out in Hunter v Hanley applied to midwives. The Defenders also made a number of subsidiary criticisms of the Pursuer’s pleadings. The Sheriff considered that the Pursuer’s failure to aver that what was actually done was something which no midwife of ordinary skill would have done if she had been acting with ordinary care was fatal to the Pursuer’s case. The Sheriff did not accept the Pursuer’s argument that this could be inferred from the pleadings or that whether or not the test had been met was a matter to be determined after Proof. The action was dismissed. The Sheriff found that there was merit in most of the subsidiary points made by the Defenders, but did not think that these would have been sufficient to warrant dismissal of the case, even if he had accepted them all.

Robbie William Scott v. Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust [2006] CSOH 92

Thu, 23 Aug 2007 00:00:00 GMT

Proof - Medical Negligence

Carter v Basildon & Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2007] EWHC 1882 (QB) (30 July 2007)

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:00:00 GMT

The Claimant’s late wife had given birth at the Defendant hospital and returned home the following day. The baby remained in the hospital’s special care unit. Six days later the Claimant’s wife had complained of headaches in the mornings. The following day she was too unwell to attend hospital. She subsequently suffered fits and fell unconscious. The following day she passed away of cerebral vinous sinus thrombosis. The hospital admitted breach of duty and accepted that had she been admitted for assessment she would have been given heparin. The hospital failed in its argument that the administering of heparin would not have prevented her death.

Zarb v Odetoyinbo [2006] EWHC 2880 (QB) (20 November 2006)

Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:00:00 GMT

The general practitioner's failure to immediately refer a patient suffering from bilateral sciatica to a surgeon was not negligent. On the facts, a surgeon would not have been negligent in not admitting the patient for surgery, and so it followed that the general practitioner could not be negligent for failing to make a same-day referral.

Horton v Evans & Anor [2006] EWHC 2808 (QB) (10 November 2006)

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 00:00:00 GMT

When dispensing a prescription, a pharmacist was required to consider whether the medication prescribed was suitable for the patient; where there had been a change to the strength or dose of the patient's medication, the question to be asked was whether the prescription really represented what the doctor had intended to prescribe or whether it was a mistake. Failure to question, where necessary, the correctness of the prescription with either the doctor or the patient was conduct below that which was to be expected of a reasonably careful and competent pharmacist.

Garcia v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust [2006] EWHC 2062 (QB) (11 August 2006)

Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:00:00 GMT

On the balance of probabilities, the cause of the injuries sustained by the claimant at her birth was a stroke rather than hypoxia. The stroke had occurred before the time when the NHS trust ought to have induced delivery and therefore causation could not be established.

McHugh v Gray [2006] EWHC 1968 (QB) (27 July 2006)

Thu, 27 Jul 2006 00:00:00 GMT

The judge had been entitled not to exercise his discretion to disapply the limitation period in a case where the claimant was suing a psychiatrist, as a result of an allegedly negligent diagnosis, seven years out of time.

Holt v Edge, High Ct, 26/7/2006

Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:00:00 GMT

On the evidence, a general practitioner was not liable in negligence to the claimant for failing to diagnose a sub-arachnoid haemorrhage and refer her to hospital as she had presented with unusual symptoms. Even if there had been negligence, it was likely that the claimant would have suffered a stroke in any event.

Demery v Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust [2006] EWCA Civ 1131 (11 July 2006)

Tue, 11 Jul 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Ankle operation – Erroneous finding on issue of causation. A judge had erred, in reaching the conclusion that negligent delay in carrying out an operation on an injured ankle had not been causative of long term disablement, because he had failed to consider whether the likelihood of the culpable delay in treatment had rendered the operation less likely to succeed.

Smith v Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, High Ct, 3/7/2006

Mon, 03 Jul 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Damage suffered during hysterectomy – Negligence not established. The NHS trust was not liable in negligence in respect of vein and nerve damage sustained by a patient during a hysterectomy as it had undertaken the appropriate courses of action when carrying out the procedure.

Farraj & Anor v King's Healthcare NHS Trust & Anor [2006] EWHC 1228 (QB) (26 May 2006)

Fri, 26 May 2006 00:00:00 GMT

A sufficient relationship of proximity existed to justify the imposition of a duty of care between a family seeking damages for wrongful birth and a third party laboratory that had prepared a sample of tissue for pre-natal DNA analysis on behalf of the defendant NHS trust.

Leggett v Norfolk, Suffolk & Cambridgshire Strategic Health Authority [2006] EWHC 1238 (QB) (26 May 2006)

Fri, 26 May 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Hospital doctors had not been negligent in their treatment of a baby who had sustained a rare brain condition shortly after his birth.

Anderson v Milton Keynes NHS Trust & Anr, High Ct, 11/5/2006

Thu, 11 May 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Breach of duty established, but causation not established on the evidence. Although a hospital had been in breach of duty by not communicating to surgeons performing an operation the results of laboratory tests showing the presence of bacteria in a patient's existing surgical wound, and in not administering appropriate antibiotics to combat those bacteria, the hospital was not liable to the patient for his eventual continuing disability as, on a substantial balance of probabilities, the bacteria would have been immune to attack by that time.

Pauline McKenzie V. Fife Acute Hospitals NHS Trust [2006] CSOH 63

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Civil Proof on Causation

YM v Gloucester Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust & Anr, High Ct, 12/4/2006

Wed, 12 Apr 2006 00:00:00 GMT

NHSLA – Reasonable security and continuity of periodical payments. The continuity of periodical payments for future pecuniary loss in respect of personal injury caused by clinical negligence was reasonably secure, under the Damages Act 1996 s.2(3), as a result of arrangements made between the NHS Litigation Authority, the parties and the secretary of state. The arrangements ensured that the NHSLA was the effective source of payments under the periodical payments orders and that the orders could be directly enforced against the NHSLA if necessary.

Younger v Dorset & Somerset Strategic Health Authority & Anr, CC (Southampton) 29/3/2006

Wed, 29 Mar 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Misdiagnosis of celiac disease – Recognised psychiatric injury not established. Where a claimant had been misdiagnosed as suffering from coeliac disease and had been on a gluten free diet for a number of years, the loss claimed for psychiatric injury, which was less than a recognised psychiatric illness, was not recoverable at law. The balance of the claim was for economic loss and was time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980.

Qureshi v Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Trust [2006] EWHC 298 (QB) (24 February 2006)

Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Bolam – No negligent breach of duty. A senior registrar in paediatric cardiology had not been negligent in deciding to reduce the dose of diuretics medication and arrange a review in a month in respect of a child who had a congenital heart defect and had suffered a large pericardial effusion since, at the time of the decisions, an echocardiogram had shown only residual pericardial effusion. The recurrence of the latter ten days later and the consequent cardiac failure and brain damage was not the fault of the hospital trust, as the decisions taken by the registrar were ones that a responsible body of senior registrars, on the particular facts, would have taken.

Burne v A, CA (Civ Div) 25/1/2006

Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Approach to Bolitho Principle. A trial judge's approach in a trial on the issue of liability to the legal principle in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (1997) 3 WLR 1151 was correct, but he should not have embarked upon it until expert witnesses had had a proper opportunity to explain why medical practice took the position that the use of open questions was a proper method to diagnose a condition.

Constable v Salford & Trafford Health Authority & Anr, High Ct, 21/12/2005

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Failure to re-test following diagnosis of Chlamydia – No breach of duty. A general practitioner was not in breach of her duty of care to a pregnant woman where medical records indicated that she had given the woman standard advice about a sexually transmitted disease further to a hospital's diagnosis of chlamydia. It had also not been proved to the requisite standard that the hospital's failure to re-test the pregnant woman for chlamydia had caused her son's premature birth.

Thompson v Bradford [2005] EWCA Civ 1439 (29 November 2005)

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Where a doctor had failed to advise that the consequences of an injection might cause discomfort during imminent surgery he should not be liable for the unforeseeable development of a vaccine strain disease caused by the operation.

Brindley v Queen's Medical Centre University Hospital NHS Trust [2005] EWHC 2647 (QB) (24 November 2005)

Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMT

The medical professional's evidence as to the advice he provided was to be preferred to that of the Claimants despite his failure to record such advice in notes.

Talisman Property Co (UK) Ltd v Norton Rose (A Firm) [2005] EWHC 2793 (Ch) (18 November 2005)

Fri, 18 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Solicitors: Although the Defendant firm had admittedly served the incorrect notice in respect of the renewal of a tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, as no compensation had been payable to the actual tenant under the mistakenly served notice, no recovery could be made on that basis. The key concern was whether the negligent service of the notice had been a material cause of the failure of the negotiations for a new tenancy. As the sum ultimately agreed in respect of dilapidations was very close to that which it had been advised was appropriate and no loss could be shown. As regards the claim for compensation although the argument would probably have failed, it had a respectable chance of success which taken with the other factors meant that the Claimant would have had a 30 per cent chance of success.

Kingsberry v Greater Manchester Strategic Health Authority [2005] EWHC (QB) 2253 (24 October 2005)

Mon, 24 Oct 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Duty of Care – Forceps Delivery: The Court held that the Defendant hospital had breached its duty of care by proceeding to deliver a baby by forceps delivery on the ward in circumstances where accepted obstetric management technique had required a trial of forceps in theatre. The resulting cerebral palsy suffered by the baby had been caused by the hospital's negligence.

Brown v Birmingham and Black Country Strategic Health Authority & Ors [2005] EWHC 1098 (QB) (22 June 2005)

Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:00 GMT

No negligence where staff failed to diagnose and treat congenital spinal defect: Notwithstanding the claimant's symptoms, neither her doctor nor medical staff at a hospital where she was examined were at fault for failing to diagnose and treat a congenital spinal defect that resulted in her contracting meningitis and subsequently suffering from a disability.

Anderson v Heathwood & Anr, High Ct, 16/6/2005

Thu, 16 Jun 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Failure to provide prompt and appropriate care and intensive support: The defendant hospital's negligent failure to provide prompt and appropriate care with intensive support was held to have caused the death of the claimant's wife from pneumonia.

McDonnell v Holwerda [2005] EWHC 1081 (QB) (27 May 2005)

Fri, 27 May 2005 00:00:00 GMT

Meningococcal infection – duty to assess aggregate symptoms and signs: In cases involving suspected meningococcal infection in a child, it was held that there is a requirement that GPs should assess the aggregate symptoms and signs that exist, even if those symptoms and signs could, individually, be assessed as non-indicative of meningococcal infection. A doctor should consider whether, by reason of their aggregate presence or their totality, when taken with the general condition of the child, a decision not to refer to hospital would involve a calculable risk of harm to the child.