header-logo header-logo

Medical negligence: secondary victims?

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll