UK MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE LAW

The Law Of Negligence

Medical Negligence Law has developed from the general principles of negligence as applied in most personal injury claims. One of the most commonly used definitions is that negligence is a failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances. In order to claim damages it is necessary to also show that the negligent person owed a duty of care to the injured person and that the injury was directly attributed to the lack of care. These general rules have been considerably modified in regards to claims for clinical damages where it is necessary to show that there has been a failure by a health care provider to treat and care for a patient with a reasonable degree of skill and care.

The Duty Of Care

The duty of care in a clinical context is usually not a difficult problem for a solicitor. Doctors or medical staff almost always owe their patient or somebody that they are looking after a duty of care. If a doctor or other health care worker including consultants, specialists, nurses, dentists, technicians or support staff is careless or lacked necessary skills then there may a liability for them or their employer or insurer to pay compensation if some one is injured as a result of their unacceptable behaviour.

Standards Of Competance

One of the most difficult questions in medical negligence law is how to judge a doctors competence and whether or not it has fallen to an unacceptable level which has caused injury to a patient. The case of Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) attempted to resolve these issues by measuring the standard of a doctor’s care against that of other doctors. If a significant number of other doctors would have acted in the same way when faced with the same circumstances then a doctor will not be found to be negligent.

The Bolam Test

The definition in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) did however cause some consternation and was slightly modified by the case of "Bolitho-v-City & Hackney Health Authority 1997" where it was held that even if a method of treatment was supported by a body of the medical profession that method of treatment must still stand up to logical analysis if it was to be used as part of the defence.

Causation Of The Injury

The final element in UK medical negligence law for a successful claim for compensation requires the claimant to prove that he has suffered injury as a result of the inadequate care. This can be a difficult proposition as the claimant was probably ill prior to the commencement of the treatment and expert medical advice must be produced to show that the claimant would have been in a better position had an alternative treatment been used.

The Limitation Act 1980

The Limitation Act applies to these cases and in general terms a claim for compensation for personal injury must be settled or legal proceedings must have been issued in a court of law within three years of the event causing the injury. Failure to comply with this rule may mean that the opportunity to claim compensation may have been lost forever.

The Limitation Act does provide certain exceptions to this rule as follows:-

• The time does not start running until the age of 18 years.
• The limitation period does run until the injury was first discovered.
• Mental incapacity of a potential claimant may mean that the time period never starts to run
• Judges have a rarely exercised discretion to override the time limits.

Specialist Solicitors

We represent a network of specialist clinical negligence solicitors operating throughout the United Kingdom. If you would like to talk to an expert lawyer just complete the contact form and a specialist solicitor will phone you to give free advice without any further obligation whatsoever.