In this blog post, Rachit Buch writes in support of the recent decision made in the case of Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1415 (QB).
Pneumococcal meningitis judgment: SC v University Hospital Southampton NHS FT [2020] EWHC 1610 (QB)
In this post, Isaac Hogarth summarises the recent case of SC v University Hospital Southampton NHS FT [2020] EWHC 1610 (QB), which involved a failure to diagnose pneumococcal meningitis.
Secondary victim claims in clinical negligence actions
In this article, Ronald Walker QC gives his thoughts on why he considers that the recent appeal case of Paul v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1415 was wrongly decided.
Standard of care in a clinical setting during the Covid-19 crisis
In this article, Isaac Hogarth discusses the issue of the standard of care to be applied to redeployed doctors in a Covid-19 setting. He suggests that legislation would be required to lay down any proposed modifications to the standard of care.
William Audland QC and Isaac Hogarth of 12KBW achieve online mediated settlement of catastrophic blindness claim secondary to raised intra-cranial pressure
William Audland QC and Isaac Hogarth of 12 King’s Bench Walk, instructed by Stewart Young of Stewarts successfully represented the claimant (“C”) in his claim against Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (“D”), achieving a settlement of £4.3 million at a video mediation. The claim arose from a delay in treating raised intracranial pressure secondary to … Continue reading William Audland QC and Isaac Hogarth of 12KBW achieve online mediated settlement of catastrophic blindness claim secondary to raised intra-cranial pressure
Cross-border clinical negligence: Harry Roberts v (1) SSAFA (2) MOD v AKV (Part 20) [2020] EWHC 994 (QB)
In this blog post, 12KBW pupil Cressida Mawdesley-Thomas looks at the recent case of Harry Roberts v (1) SSAFA (2) MOD v AKV (Part 20) [2020] EWHC 994 (QB), which involved allegations of clinical negligence arising out of the claimant's birth in a German hospital serving British military personnel and their families. The judgment relates to the issues of applicable law and limitation rather than substantive clinical negligence matters; however, it is useful for practitioners dealing with claims where the index treatment has occurred abroad.
COVID-19 and Clinical Negligence Claims
Here, Henry Charles, Michael Brace and Lizzie Boulden explain why they consider that COVID-19 related clinical negligence claims arising out of redeployed healthcare professionals are unlikely to succeed on the present law. This should provide considerable comfort to healthcare professionals who are not only bravely risking their lives, but who are also working in unfamiliar roles in the national effort to fight the pandemic.
Developing an ICU Triage Protocol for COVID-19
In this blog, Daniel Sokol of 12KBW talks of his experience as a barrister and medical ethicist developing an ICU triage protocol for COVID-19. Daniel writes for the British Medical Journal on medical ethics and has also written books on the subject.
NKX (By his mother and litigation friend NMK) -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 828 (QB)
In this blog post, Helen Waller of 12KBW discusses the case of NKX (By his mother and litigation friend NMK) -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 828 (QB), which involved a birth injury due to clinical negligence. Although it is a case largely based on its own facts, it is nonetheless an example of careful judicial analysis of complex and detailed expert evidence. It demonstrates the importance of the parties and the court having a full understanding of the medical issues in order to properly address both breach and causation.
Who to sue? Doctor held to be an independent contractor in Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13
In this blog post, pupils Cressida Mawdesley-Thomas and Tim Goodwin discuss the recent case of Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants [2020] UKSC 13. Whilst this might more appropriately fall under the definition of an employer's liability case, it is worth noting that this case centred on the activities of a doctor, and therefore it provides useful guidance on who might be the correct defendant in a case relating to medical professionals who appear to be acting as "independent contractors".
Clinical Negligence Law 