In this blog Thea Wilson of 12KBW considers the recent judgment of Thefaut v Johnston in which Green J provides his characteristic clarity of thought on informed consent, materiality in the context of consent and how to deal with medical experts whose independence is called into question. The facts The Claimant developed back pain in … Continue reading Thefaut v Johnston  EWHC 497 (QB) (14 March 2017); informed consent, materiality and experts whose independence is called into question
In this blog Vanessa Cashman of 12KBW considers Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust where the Court of Appeal considered what, if any duty, is owed by a receptionist of an A&E department to a patient in respect of the provision of information. By a majority it was held that no duty is owed … Continue reading Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust  EWCA Civ 151; Court of Appeal divided over whether an A&E receptionist owes a duty of care
This post is by Isaac Hogarth of 12 King’s Bench Walk. Isaac appeared on behalf of AJ’ parents and was instructed by Rosie Nelson and Emily Palmer of Penningtons Manches. AJ, a 5-year-old boy died from sepsis, following treatment received at Hillingdon Hospital on 22 December 2015. Based on his initial presentation, AJ was treated … Continue reading Inquest touching the death of AJ; unreported 23 March 2017: hospital inquests and findings of neglect
This blog post by Lois Aldred considers the decision in Crossman v St George’s Hospital Trust which raises interesting issues relating to the applicability of the decision in Chester v Afshar. The Facts The Claimant was a 63-year-old man who sought treatment for a numb arm and painful, stiff neck. Investigations revealed widespread degenerative changes and … Continue reading Rodney Crossman v St George’s Healthcare Trust  EWHC 2878 (QB) ; Chester v Afshar revisited
This post considering the standing of the Bolam principle is by David Sanderson of 12 King's Bench Walk. Two judgments handed down this month explore the boundaries of the Bolam principle and limit its application. In the first, Kerr J doubted that Bolam was apposite where the court is concerned, not with a choice between two … Continue reading Bolam under attack: Muller v Kings College Hospital and Webster v Burton Hospitals
This is a post by Andrew Roy and Alex Carrington of 12 King's Bench Walk An important decision in the changing world of cost budgeting. Facts : The Appellant bought a claim against the Respondent for damages for clinical negligence. Proceedings were commenced and the Appellant’s budget was approved at a CCMC. Following the exchange … Continue reading Merrix v. Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust  EWHC 346 (QB); Costs budgeting
In this post Henry Charles of 12 King's Bench Walk considers the implications of the recent change to the discount rate. Minus 0.75%. The initial reaction: claimant nirvana …and if so for how long? The Lord Chancellor’s statement heralded the new rate with the assertion that minus 0.75% was the only answer on a gilts based … Continue reading The Discount Rate Decision: Right or Wrong, Gilt Edged or Double Edged?