header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Second chances & the relative (in)significance of Bailey

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
27 May 2022 / Claire Christopholus , David Locke
Issue: 7980 / Categories: Features , Clinical negligence
printer mail-detail
82845
Claire Christopholus & David Locke on a clinical negligence claim that ran again & the influence of Bailey
  • Reviews an attempt to bring a clinical negligence claim again, 16 years after it was discontinued, on the basis Bailey changed the law on material contribution.
  • Covers Astley v Mid-Cheshire Hospitals Foundation and refers to Bailey v Ministry of Defence.

In Astley v Mid-Cheshire Hospitals Foundation NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 337 (QB), Mr Justice Eyre refused the claimant’s application, made pursuant to CPR Pt 38.7, for permission to bring what was ostensibly the same claim against the defendant, some 16 years after the original claim had been discontinued. A key issue was whether the decision in Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] All ER (D) 382 (Jul), [2009] 1 WLR 1052 represented a change in the law.

Background

It was alleged Mr Astley suffered a brain injury as a consequence of a delay in his delivery, in 1997. Proceedings were issued in 2004 but were then

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
Are you suited to a career in prosecution?
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
LSB marks Mazur homework
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)
NLJ this week: Stuck in the past?
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
NLJ this week: No automatic bar on ‘user damages’
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
NLJ this week: Next gen wealth planning meets modern family reality
The next generation is inheriting more than assets—it is inheriting complexity. Writing in NLJ this week, experts from Penningtons Manches Cooper chart how global mobility, blended families and evolving values are reshaping private wealth advice
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll