Posted inIssue 5 Regulatory

Professional Regulation

(1) General Medical Council (2) Professional Standards Authority for Health & Social Care v Asef Zafar [2020] EWHC 846  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). The Divisional Court substituted a sanction of erasure for a 12 month suspension in this appeal by the GMC and PSA arising…
May 1, 2020Posted inIssue 5, RegulatoryTags:
Posted inClinical negligence Costs Issue 5

Wasted Costs Arising from an Expert’s Breach of Duty

Thimmaya v Lancashire NHS Foundation Trust [2020] PNLR 12  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). An expert witness had failed to fulfil his duty to the court under CPR 35 to provide competent expert evidence and therefore a wasted costs order was made against him for the…
May 1, 2020Posted inClinical negligence, Costs, Issue 5Tags: 1 Comment
Posted inCourt of Protection Issue 5

Best Interests Assessment and Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration

A Clinical Commissioning Group v AF [2020] EWCOP 16  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). Following a hearing that took place via Skype due to the COVID-19 medical emergency, the court decided it was not in the best interests of a stroke patient to have his Clinically…
May 1, 2020Posted inCourt of Protection, Issue 5Tags: ,
Posted inCosts Issue 5

“The Race Is Not (Yet) To The Swift”: With Apologies to Ecclesiastes 9:11

Swift v Carpenter [2020] EWCA Civ 165 This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). So Swift v Carpenter rumbles on. The restrictions imposed during the Covid-19 pandemic have meant that the adjourned appeal of 24 July 2019, due for hearing on 23 March 2020 and listed for four…
May 1, 2020Posted inCosts, Issue 5
Posted inClinical negligence Issue 5

Consent and Causation

Pepper v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 310 (QB)  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). The Claimant alleged that she unnecessarily underwent a laparotomy and Whipple’s procedure, an operation undertaken to remove cancerous tumours from the head of the pancreas. The procedure was carried…
May 1, 2020Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 5Tags: ,
Posted inClinical negligence Issue 5

The Standard of Care in Pure Diagnosis Cases

Brady v Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 158 (QB)  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). In the bulk of actions for clinical negligence, the standard of care owed to the patient is one point which attracts relatively little judicial consternation. In Brady, and cases…
May 1, 2020Posted inClinical negligence, Issue 5Tags: ,
Posted inAbuse/Child Abuse Issue 5

Vicarious Liability – Child Sexual Abuse

Haringey London Borough Council v FZO [2020] EWCA Civ 180  DSN v Blackpool Football Club [2020] EWHC 695 (QB)  EXE v Governors of the Royal Naval School [2020] EWHC 596 (QB)  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). Three recent cases have illustrated the application of a number…
May 1, 2020Posted inAbuse/Child Abuse, Issue 5Tags:
Posted inInquests Issue 5

Article 2 Inquests and Community-Based Psychiatric Patients

R (Lee) v HM Assistant Coroner for the City of Sunderland [2019] EWHC 3227 (Admin)  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). It is now eight years since the Supreme Court found that the death of a voluntary mental health patient whilst on leave could engage the state’s…
May 1, 2020Posted inInquests, Issue 5Tags:
Posted inIssue 5 Public

Transgender Fathers and Birth Certificates

R (McConnell and YY) v Registrar General [2020] EWCA Civ 559  This article was originally published in Issue 5 (May 2020). The Court of Appeal has revisited the tension between the wish of a transgender person to have their legal gender recognised on their child’s birth certificate and the right of…
May 1, 2020Posted inIssue 5, PublicTags: ,
Posted inCourt of Protection Issue 5

Permission Refused for a Review of Contact Arrangements

A v B and Ors [2020] EWCOP 1  This article originally appeared in Issue 5 (May 2020). A mother was refused permission to apply for a full review of the arrangements for contact with her severely autistic son, on the basis that she could not show a “good arguable case”…
May 1, 2020Posted inCourt of Protection, Issue 5