header-logo header-logo

Negligence

26 April 2013
Issue: 7557 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Ecclestone v Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2013] EWHC 790 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 72 (Apr)

It was settled law that the standard of care to be applied to a surgeon was that of the reasonable surgeon exercising and professing to have the necessary skill to undertake the surgery in question. The starting point in considering whether there had been negligence on the part of a medical practitioner was to determine whether he had acted in accordance with a responsible body of practitioners skilled in the particular medical field in question. Further, in the vast majority of cases, the fact that distinguished experts in the field were of a particular opinion would demonstrate the reasonableness of that opinion. In particular, where there were questions of assessment of the relative risks and benefits of adopting a particular medical practice, a reasonable view necessarily presupposed that the relative risks and benefits had been weighed by the experts in forming their opinions. However, if, in a rare case, it could be demonstrated that the professional opinion was not capable of withstanding

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll