Posted inClinical negligence Issue 11

Non-Delegable Duty Healthcare Litigation: The Widening Woodland Boundaries

Hughes v Rattan [2022] EWCA Civ 107 In Hughes v Rattan [2022] EWCA Civ 107, the Court of Appeal answered the following question: was the owner and principal of a dental practice liable for the negligence of his self-employed associates? The claim arose from NHS care provided by three associate dentists. The…
May 24, 2022Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 11Tags: , ,
Posted inClinical negligence Issue 10

Dental Negligence, Vicarious Liability and Non-Delegable Duty: A Test Case

Hughes v Rattan [2021] EWHC 2032 (QB) In Hughes v Rattan [2021] EWHC 2032 (QB), the High Court was asked to answer the following question: was the owner of a dental practice liable for the dental negligence of a self-employed dentist engaged to work in the practice? The claim arose from NHS…
January 24, 2022Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 10Tags: ,
Posted inClinical negligence Issue 9

Supreme Court Revisits Wrongful Birth Claims

Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 In Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 the Supreme Court has revisited the principles to be applied in 'wrongful birth” claims: claims for the cost of bringing up a disabled child who would not have been born but for a doctor’s negligent medical advice/treatment.…
July 28, 2021Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 9Tags: ,
Posted inClinical negligence Issue 7

Mental Health, Clinical Negligence and the Illegality Defence

Ecila Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Trust Foundation [2020] UKSC 43 In Ecila Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Trust Foundation [2020] UKSC 43 the Supreme Court has revisited the defence of illegality (“ex turpi causa”) in the context of a claim for clinical negligence. The Claimant — a…
March 8, 2021Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 7Tags:
Posted inIssue 6 Regulatory

GMC Not Bound by Erroneous First Instance Concession on Appeal

General Medical Council v Zafar [2020] EWHC 246  This article originally appeared in Issue 6 (September 2020). In General Medical Council v Zafar [2020] EWHC 246 a Divisional Court of the High Court affirmed two propositions: one surprising, one not. Unsurprisingly, the court affirmed the proposition that doctors who prepare…
September 1, 2020Posted inIssue 6, RegulatoryTags:
Posted inIssue 3 Regulatory

The Death of the Right to Silence in Regulatory Proceedings?

Kuzmin v GMC [2019] EWHC 2129 (Admin)  Sanusi v GMC [2019] EWCA Civ 1172  This article originally appeared in Issue 3 (November 2019). Two recent cases have important consequences for regulated professionals who fail to participate in regulatory hearings. In Kuzmin v GMC [2019] EWHC 2129 (Admin) the issue was…
November 1, 2019Posted inIssue 3, RegulatoryTags: , ,