header-logo header-logo

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

Negligence

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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