header-logo header-logo

27 October 2014
Issue: 7628 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Saatchi's Medical Innovation Bill may impact on patient safety

Personal injury lawyers have warned Lord Saatchi’s Medical Innovation Bill could drive vulnerable patients into the hands of “maverick” doctors.

Lord Saatchi’s bill would give legal protection to doctors seeking to try alternative procedures or treatments for cancer. It goes to committee stage in the House of Lords next week.

However, John Spencer, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (Apil) said that, contrary to popular perception, the Bill would not just apply to “dying people who are willing to give anything a chance". 

“In fact, the Bill will affect all patients who, in their vulnerability, may be tempted to take risks at the hands of maverick doctors who are over-ambitious in their drive to make names for themselves. Lord Saatchi’s amendments to the Bill do not address concerns about patient safety raised by doctors, patient groups, and medical research organisations. 

“Under the Bill, a doctor needs to only ‘obtain the views’ of an ‘appropriately qualified doctor’ before undertaking an innovative treatment.

"Crucially, he would not have to act on those views, and we still don’t know what an ‘appropriately qualified doctor’ is.”

Spencer said he had heard of no cases of a doctor being sued for using an innovative treatment, and that if some doctors were holding back from certain treatments due to a misunderstanding of the law then that could be could by “an effort to educate, not legislate”.

 

Issue: 7628 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll