Charley Turton begins 2021 with a look ahead to the Essure sterilisation implant litigation, including in particular how it may be impacted by the damning Cumberlege review. What is Essure? Essure, a permanent, non-surgical birth control implant was approved by NICE and first marketed in the UK in 2009. A small coil made from polyester … Continue reading Essure sterilisation implant litigation: Product liability and clinical negligence post-Cumberlege
In the first post of the second instalment of this two-part series looking at COVID-19 vaccinations, Elizabeth Boulden and Cressida Mawdesley-Thomas consider no-fault compensation under the Vaccine Damage Payment scheme. This article was first published as a News Analysis article on Lexis®PSL.
The Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) has given Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 temporary authorisation under regulation 174 of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012, which enables temporary authorisation to be granted in response to situations such as pandemics. In this blog, which is the first of a two-part series, Cressida Mawdesley-Thomas considers when there could be civil liability for an unlicensed vaccine. It also considers the conditions imposed by the MHRA for the granting of the temporary authorisation to Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine.
In this blog post, Megan Griffiths summarises and analyses the High Court’s recent decision in Bell v Tavistock NHS Trust. This judicial review decision looks at informed consent practices for children and young people with gender dysphoria, whether they can achieve Gillick competence for consenting to puberty blocking treatment, and what such consent processes would require in practice. This decision is likely to impact on guidance specific to gender dysphoria, but the findings on the types of information required for informed consent in young people are also likely to be relevant to other areas of clinical practice.
In this blog post, Ed Ramsay and David Sharpe QC examine the recent Supreme Court decision in the case of Maughan. This case concerns an inquest, and we feel that updates in inquest law would be of interest to readers given that inquests often feature in clinical negligence cases involving a fatal incident.
Samuel Cuthbert writes about this recent case, which involved issues of material contribution as well as defendant expert evidence which appeared to intentionally paint the claimant in a bad light.
In this post, Dr David Sharpe QC considers the defence of illegality in the context of clinical negligence following the Supreme Court judgment in Ecila Henderson (A Protected Party, by her litigation friend, The Official Solicitor) (Appellant) v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent)  UKSC43.
William Audland QC and Isaac Hogarth of 12 King’s Bench Walk, instructed by Hugh Johnson of Stewarts successfully represented the claimant (“C”) in his claim against University College London Hospitals NHS Trust (“D”), weeks before the start of a trial on liability, achieving a settlement of £4.5 million at a video Joint Settlement Meeting (JSM).
Reflections on the Cumberlege Committee Report from a Clinical Negligence Perspective by Henry Charles and Vanessa Cashman
In this post, 12KBW pupil Samuel Cuthbert considers the ramifications of the case of Bradfield-Kay v Cope  EWHC 1352 (QB) for the tests set out in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee  1 WLR 583 and Bolitho v City and Hackney HA  AC 232.