‘A Portsmouth GP has been told he could spend time behind bars after he admitted to defrauding a healthcare group out of £1.1m in just two months.’
The Independent, 22nd September 2021
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘An anaesthetist has been given a 14-and-a-half year jail sentence for injecting his partner with drugs during a series of exorcism ceremonies that left her close to death.’
The Guardian, 20th September 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The British Medical Association (BMA) has dropped its opposition to assisted dying and adopted a neutral stance on the issue.’
The Guardian, 14th September 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Remote GP appointments may have been a contributing factor in the deaths of five people who did not see their doctor face to face, a coroner has concluded.’
Daily Telegraph, 10th September 2021
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Disgraced breast surgeon Ian Paterson has launched a bid to have his conviction for putting women through unnecessary surgery overturned, in a move that has left victims devastated.’
The Independent, 14th August 2021
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘In Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 the Supreme Court has revisited the principles to be applied in “wrongful birth” claims: claims for the cost of bringing up a disabled child who would not have been born but for a doctor’s negligent medical advice/treatment. However, the judgment has implications beyond the world of clinical negligence litigation. The Supreme Court has taken the opportunity to clarify the components or ingredients of the tort of negligence more generally. In particular, the court has affirmed the importance of the “scope of duty” principle: a principle which limits the recoverability of damages wherever it applies.’
Quarterly Medical Law Review, 28th July 2021
Source: 1corqmlr.com
‘In this highly anticipated judgment, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal and held that the Defendant doctor was only liable for losses which fell within the scope of her duty of care, thereby significantly reducing the damages recoverable by the Claimant.’
Hailsham Chambers, 21st July 2021
Source: www.hailshamchambers.com
‘Hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants face being blocked from booking Covid vaccinations, it can be revealed, because GP surgeries are refusing to register them – in breach of official guidance.’
The Independent, 16th July 2021
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The focus of this judgment was on the jurisdiction, if any, that the High Court Family Division has to maintain a Reporting Restriction Order (‘RRO’) prohibiting the naming of any medical clinicians as being involved in the care and treatment of a child who had been the subject of “end of life” proceedings before the High Court prior to their death, and where an RRO had been made at that time preventing the identification of any of the treating clinicians and staff until further order.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 6th July 2021
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘In Meadows v Khan [2021] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Ms Meadows’ appeal, finding that there was no principled basis for excluding a clinical negligence claim from the ambit of the ‘scope of duty principle’ in the tort of negligence. The judgment can be read here. This short blog looks at the majority’s reasoning.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 24th June 20201
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘In Khan v. Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 the Supreme Court has revisited the principles to be applied in “wrongful birth” claims: claims for the cost of bringing up a disabled child who would not have been born but for a doctor’s negligent medical advice/treatment. However, the judgment has implications beyond the world of clinical negligence litigation. The Supreme Court has taken the opportunity to clarify the components or ingredients of the tort negligence more generally. In particular, the Court has affirmed the importance of the “scope of duty” principle: a principle which limits the recoverability of damages wherever it applies. In particular, it is not sufficient for a claimant to establish that – with competent advice – they would have made a different decision about their treatment or care. They must also demonstrate that the particular harm that they have suffered fell within the scope of the defendant’s duty of care.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 24th June 2021
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Throughout the pandemic, unlawful do not resuscitate orders (DNRs) were placed upon people in the United Kingdom. Did it unfairly target disabled patients?’
Each Other, 22nd June 2021
Source: eachother.org.uk
‘During the pandemic, the public’s gratitude to the medical profession has been palpable. But rightly, practitioners continue to be regulated, supervised by the Courts. Here we report a clutch of decisions highlighting some common themes: the importance of transparency and maintaining public confidence in the profession; managing conflicts of interest; making and handling findings of dishonesty.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th June 2021
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Labour has urged the NHS and Matt Hancock to pause their plan to share medical records from GPs to allow time for greater consultation on how the idea would work, saying that maintaining patients’ trust must be paramount.’
The Guardian, 6th June 2021
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Cauda equina syndrome is a rare and severe type of spinal stenosis. A narrowing of the spinal canal causes the nerves in the lower back to become severely compressed. Typically, but not exclusively, it results from a prolapsed disc bulge. The condition requires urgent hospital admission and timely surgery (usually decompression of the disc). The longer it goes untreated, the greater the chance it will result in permanent paralysis and incontinence. On that account, it leads to claims for clinical negligence, notably in respect of delayed diagnosis, whether against hospital or GP. On that account too, such claims have latterly given rise to a number of decisions by the higher courts. The purpose of this blog is to review three of them.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 29th April 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has given doctors permission to end the life of a brain-damaged six-year-old girl at the centre of a long-running treatment fight.’
BBC News, 30th April 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The law requires medical practitioners to use diligence, care, knowledge, skill and caution in administering treatment to a patient. The question of whether a medical practitioner has met the requisite standard of care is often considered by reference to the test laid down in the case of Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] WLR 582. In Bolam, the Claimant sustained fractures of the acetabula during a course of electro-convulsive therapy administered to him at the Defendant’s mental hospital. In considering whether the Defendant was negligent in the manner in which it carried out the treatment, McNair J confirmed that: “the true test of establishing negligence in diagnosis or treatment on the part of a doctor was whether … he has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art” (p.587). As case law has developed, so have the principles underpinning the issue of breach of duty in medical negligence cases. This has led to a recognition that the Bolam test is not appropriate to apply in every case.’
Ropewalk Clinical Negligence Blog, 20th April 2021
Source: www.ropewalk.co.uk
‘The Claimant brought a claim for damages against her General Practitioner for a missed diagnosis of breast cancer. As a result of the negligence, the Claimant had to undergo a mastectomy and axillary dissection, which would otherwise have been unnecessary. The Claimant argued that these treatments had left her with incapacitating chronic pain. The Defendant admitted breach of duty and causation, but contended that her claim should be dismissed because she had been fundamentally dishonest in relation to the claim.’
Parklane Plowden, 1st April 2021
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘It is difficult to know where to start with Towuaghantse v GMC [2021] EWHC 681 (Admin). I will give you a briefest account of the facts in a moment, but potentially Mostyn J’s judgment in this case stands as authority for the following principles:
a. The factual findings of a coroner, and any narrative conclusion, are all admissible against a registrant.
b. Authors of expert reports do not have to be independent in the sense of uninvolved with the institution or any of the players in a case, they are merely subject to a Porter v McGill style test of bias or apparent bias.
c. The capacity of a registrant to remediate sincerely should be judged by reference to evidence unconnected with their denials of the factual charges, unless the fact-finding decision included findings of blatant dishonesty by the registrant (a refinement of the same judge’s recent pronouncements in GMC v Awan [2020] EWHC 1553 (Admin)).’
2 Hare Court, 30th March 2021
Source: www.2harecourt.com
‘Known as Operation Cavell, the initiative will see a senior officer review all reports of assaults and hate crime against NHS staff. Following a three-month pilot, the National Health Service (NHS), Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have been working in partnership to launch the scheme today (Wednesday, 31 March) which aims to increase convictions and protect NHS staff on the frontline.’
Crown Prosecution Service, 31st March 2021
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025