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 ...
|
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 ultimate ...
|
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 purc ...
|
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 a ...
|
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 prompt ...
|
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 prompt ...
|
Assessment Of Damages In Professional Negligence Claim Where Solicitors Exceeded Clients’ Authority In Group Litigation Case
Steel J held that that the defendant solicitor firm had been negligent in concluding settlement on behalf of the claimant without authority and in negligently failing to advise the claimant as to the ongoing issues arising in the group litigation, of which the claimant had previously thereto been a party. Damages were awarded on the basis that had the defendant not concluded settlement on behalf of the claimant without authority, the claimant would have remained a party to the group litigation i ...
|
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 expert ...
|
Obstetrician Not Negligent In Failing To Continue Or Carry Out Further Cardiotocograph
Slade J DBE dismissed the claimant’s claim against the defendant for the alleged clinical negligence of one of its obstetricians in not continuing or repeating a cardiotocograph scan on her mother when she was pregnant with the claimant. Slade J DBE accepted that the defendant had acted negligently in forming the view that the trace from the scan was satisfactory. Whilst the scan should have been repeated or continued, Slade J DBE held that the claimant had not established that such continuance ...
|
GP Had Not Failed To Diagnose Symptoms Of Meningitis
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 ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |