In this post Ted Cunningham of 12KBW examines the recent High Court decision in NILUJAN RAJATHEEPAN v BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE NHS FOUNDATION TRUST  EWHC 716 (QB). The case highlights the importance of proper and effective communication between medical professionals and patients who do not have a good grasp of English. In circumstances where medical professionals believe that they have communicated effectively, that belief must be objectively reasonable.
In this post Vanessa Cashman of 12KBW discusses the recent decision of Yip J in Meadows v Khan  EWHC 2990 (QB), a case concerning the recoverability of additional costs arising out of a disability unconnected with the negligent failure to diagnose that led to a wrongful birth.
In this post Farhana Mukith discusses the case of Shaw v (1) Kovac & (2) University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust  EWCA Civ 1028, in which the Court of Appeal considered whether compensation for the unlawful invasion of a patient’s personal rights ought to be recognised as a separate and free-standing cause of action.
In this post Rachit Buch of 12KBW discusses the Court of Appeal’s recent reversal of Nicol J’s decision to strike out a claim on the basis that a doctor did not owe a duty of care to disclose a patient’s hereditary disease to his child.
Overturning the decision the Court of Appeal held that it was arguable that medical practitioners could be liable for failing to inform family members of a diagnosis where there was definite, reliable and critical medical information as would be the case in clinical genetics.
In this blog Isaac Hogarth of 12KBW discusses the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal which considers the limits of the causation principles set down by the House of Lords in Chester v Afshar. Continue reading “Correia v University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust  EWCA Civ 356: where are the limits to the Chester v Afshar exception to causation?”
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 Claimant developed back pain in late 2011. Although it resolved relatively speedily, it reoccurred at the end of January/start of February 2012. After having some treatment through the NHS, the Claimant consulted the Defendant privately in March 2012. The Defendant was described by the Court as a surgeon of long standing, good repute and vast experience. At a consultation on 15th March 2012, the Defendant recommended conservative treatment. He later wrote to the Claimant’s GP noting that her real concern was back pain rather than slight numbness in her left leg. Continue reading “Thefaut v Johnston  EWHC 497 (QB) (14 March 2017); informed consent, materiality and experts whose independence is called into question”