Clinical Medical Negligence

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.

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.

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

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

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:00:00 GMT

Civil Proof on Causation