header-logo header-logo

01 March 2024 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8061 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Damages , National Health Service
printer mail-detail

Medical negligence: secondary victims?

161581
Nicholas Dobson considers the debate on the extension of the duty of care to patients’ relatives
  • Doctors have no duty of care to close relatives of their patients to protect the relatives from risk of illness by witnessing the death or serious illness of those patients from a medical condition which the doctor had negligently failed to diagnose and treat.
  • Covers Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust.

To witness the death or serious injury of someone close and loved must be a deeply harrowing experience. As the late Queen Elizabeth observed to families bereaved by the September 11 terror attacks in 2001: ‘Grief is the price we pay for love.’ But if medically negligent treatment given by doctors results in psychological or other injury to the patient’s relatives, do doctors have a duty of care to those relatives?

This was the thorny question faced by a panel of seven justices in the Supreme Court in May 2023 and on 11 January 2024, when judgment was given in Paul

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll