bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary
The test is based on a long line of cases dating back more than a hundred years, but it takes its authority in modern times This case was brought by the mother of Patrick Bolitho, a young boy who died following a cardiac arrest in hospital that resulted in severe brain damage. JISCBAILII_CASES_TORT Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46; [1998] AC 232; [1997] 4 All ER 771; [1997] 3 WLR 1151 (13th November, 1997) HOUSE OF LORDS Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord NolanLord Hoffmann Lord Clyde OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) ... SAGE Business Cases Real-world cases at your fingertips opens in new tab; Although he was revived, he suffered severe brain damage and later died. Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. A summary of the case of Mead v East Hertfordshire Health Authority was published in the journal of the charity now known as Action against Medical Accidents 4. The House of Lords explained that a defendant cannot argue that their breach of duty did not cause the harm because they would also have committed some other breach. You can filter on reading intentions from the list, as well as view them within your profile.. Read the guide × Her two-year-old son had been admitted to hospital with … House of Lords' 1997 decision in Bolitho v. City and Hackney H.A.4 By virtue of that decision, peer professional opinion which purportedly represents evidence of responsible medical practice can be departed from, if that opinion is determined by the court to be "not capable of withstanding logical analysis", or is otherwise "unreasonable" or James Watt. The child died as a result. However, he did not think the testimony of the other three experts was "unreasonable" or "illogical" therefore he could not dismiss them. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. The professional opinion relied upon cannot be unreasonable or illogical. The doctor argued that even if she had attended to the child, she would not have intubated him. Hong Kong Med J. The case was settled before trial. 771 has, in theory and practice, altered the English law on standard of care in clinical negligence cases to the benefit of claimants (patient/plaintiffs). Patrick had two respiratory episodes where he went pale and his breathing became "noisy". In this case Lord Browne-Wilkinson reminded the court that they are Main arguments in this case: A medical professional can be held negligent even if the standard of care he or she applied in treating a patient was in accordance with the other professional in his or her field. In terms of factual causation the leading authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. That decision would have been supported by a body of professional opinion. References: Gazette 04-Dec-1996, Times 27-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 938, [1996] 35 BMRLR 39 Links: Bailii Coram: Brooke LJ Ratio: The choice of the telephone as a means of alerting and re-assuring people, who had received treatment from a health worker later found to be HIV+, was proper. The only real modification arose as a result of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, a case which propounded that the body of the medical opinion must be “reasonable, responsible or respectable” and have “a logical and defensible basis”. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. Areas of applicable law: Tort law – Duty of care – professional negligence. Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 is a Tort Law case focusing on breach of duty, causation and the Bolam Test. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority. In the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords has decided on the test to be applied in cases of what I would call "secondary negligence". It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. Legal versus medical causation. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords followed and applied the ‘Bolam principle’. Citations: [1998] AC 232; [1997] 3 WLR 1151; [1997] 4 All ER 771; [1998] PIQR P10; [1998] Lloyd’s Rep Med 26; (1998) 39 BMLR 1. Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority. The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] 2 AC 232. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. Judgement for the case Bolitho v City & Hackney HA V was in hospital and suffered respiratory problems twice and recovered, the doctor having failed to turn up. 1. From Bolam to Bolitho: unravelling medical protectionism Christopher Stone January 2011 Introduction In 1990/91 the cost of clinical negligence claims to the NHS was estimated at around £52 million1.Twenty years later, by 2009/10, the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) As such, even though the defendant was in breach by failing to attend to the child, that breach did not cause death: the child would have died in any event. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771: A two-year-old boy suffered brain damage as a result of the bronchial air passages becoming blocked leading to cardiac arrest. See also Bolam principle. In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. Bolam sets out that a doctor is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion. Search Browse; Resources MENU. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority1 IN recent years, considerable criticism has been levelled at the test for determining the standard of care in negligence with respect to persons within the medical profession. All the experts agreed that intubation is not a routine, risk-free process. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. Mr Jones argued that the obstetrician was negligent on the basis of the test in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, refined in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority The case. Langslow A. PMID: 10568414 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Hong Kong Med J. Blyth v Bloomsbury Health Authority (1993) 4 Med LR 151, 157. The House of Lords noted that the courts are only likely to find that a practice is not logical or defensible in rare cases. This means that the court must be satisfied that the experts directed their minds to the risks and benefits of the practice and reached a defensible conclusion. The doctor never attended. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. Mr Jones argued that the obstetrician was negligent on the basis of the test in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, refined in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582. ... Case Report: Webley v St George’s Hospital NHS Trust and anr [2014] EWHC 299. Five of them said they would have intubated Patrick after the second episode, let alone the first. Add to My Bookmarks Export citation. Solicitor, London See all articles by this author. In his opinion Lord Browne-Wilkinson accepted the principle that a judge would have to consider whether a body of medical opinion was logical, but decided that the opinion used by the defence in Bolitho was indeed logical. In the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords has decided on the test to be applied in cases of what I would call "secondary negligence". If Dr Horn had come to see Patrick, she would not have intubated him. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority: HL 24 Jul 1997. Pearce v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [1999] 48 BMLR 118. The only real modification arose as a result of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, a case which propounded that the body of the medical opinion must be “reasonable, responsible or respectable” and have “a logical and defensible basis”. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority House of Lords. Why Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important. Patrick Bolitho, a two-year-old boy, was suffering from croup. The claimant was the estate of a child who suffered respiratory failure and was taken to the hospital. The original judge also concluded that Dr Horn failing to go and attend to Patrick did not cause his death. The aim of this paper is to consider whether the decision of the House of Lords in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All.E.R. Buchanan, Alec. My Lords, This appeal raises two questions relating to … Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority: HL 24 Jul 1997. The House of Lords noted that the courts are only likely to find that a practice is not logical or defensible in rare cases. Cases - Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Record details Name Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Date [1997] Citation UKHL 46 Keywords Expert witness Summary. Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. The claimant argued that this could have been avoided if the child had been intubated. This chapter discusses the legal case between Bolitho v. City & Hackney Health Authority [1996], including the detail of the case and its implications. 1. This month we examine Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority, 1993. 1999 Jun;6(11):36-7. The child’s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the child should have been seen and intubated. [2], The House of Lords held that "a defendant cannot escape liability by saying that the damage would have occurred in any event because he would have committed some other breach of duty thereafter". The child suffered brain damage and ultimately died. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. The test is based on a long line of cases dating back more than a hundred years, but it takes its authority in modern times Bolitho v City & Hackney HA – Case Summary. JISCBAILII_CASES_TORT Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46; [1998] AC 232; [1997] 4 All ER 771; [1997] 3 WLR 1151 (13th November, 1997) HOUSE OF LORDS Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord NolanLord Hoffmann Lord Clyde OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Jones RD. Only in "a rare case" would the courts find that the body of opinion is unreasonable. Skip to content. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Show all authors. But Dr Horn argued that even if she had come to see Patrick, she would not have intubated him, and such a decision would have been consistent with a respectable body of professional opinion. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. The case arose out of the admitted failure by the Defendant Trust to diagnose the Claimant’s husband’s lung cancer; accordingly it was concerned with factual causation. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. On the health authority's side, it was admitted that Dr Horn had breached her duty of care in not coming to see Patrick. Bolitho V. City and Hackney Health Authority The Test in Cases of Secondary Medical Negligence Martin Spencer . Her two-year-old son had been admitted to hospital with … The child died. Judgement for the case Bolitho v City & Hackney HA V was in hospital and suffered respiratory problems twice and recovered, the doctor having failed to turn up. 1. [1], A group of eight medical experts testified in the case at first instance. The respiratory failure developed into cardiac arrest. LORD BROWNE-WILKINSON. From Bolam to Bolitho: unravelling medical protectionism Christopher Stone January 2011 Introduction In 1990/91 the cost of clinical negligence claims to the NHS was estimated at around £52 million1.Twenty years later, by 2009/10, the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) [3] Especially on a young child as they must be anaesthetised and ventilated. Therefore she was not negligent. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. The child died as a result. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, 1997, Lord Browne-Wilkinson restricted the boundaries of Bolam, stating The House of Lords decision in Bolitho seems to be a departure from the old Bolam test established by the Queen's Bench Division in a 1957 case Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee. BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) (DECEASED) (A.P.) Bolitho v City & Hackney HA – Case Summary. Did the doctor’s failure to attend to the patient. The case arose out of the admitted failure by the Defendant Trust to diagnose the Claimant’s husband’s lung cancer; accordingly it was concerned with factual causation. City and Hackney Health Authority continued (back to preceding text) Where, as in the present case, a breach of a duty of care is proved or admitted, the burden still lies on the plaintiff to prove that such breach caused the injury suffered: Bonnington Castings Ltd. v. Wardlaw [1956] A.C. 613; Wilsher v. Three of them said they would not have. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 is a Tort Law case focusing on breach of duty, causation and the Bolam Test. 2002 Jun;8(3):222-3. He was admitted into St Bartholomew's Hospital and was placed under the care of Dr Horn (the senior registrar) and Dr Rodger. Search Google Scholar for this author. A doctor was summoned but did not attend as her bleep was not working due to low battery. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771: A two-year-old boy suffered brain damage as a result of the bronchial air passages becoming blocked leading to cardiac arrest. Legal versus medical causation. The quotation from a “judge”, cited in the editorial, cannot be verified and can only have been misattributed. The Bolam test says that an action cannot be a breach of duty if it conforms with a reasonable body of professional opinion. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. Chappel v Hart (1998) 156 ALR 517. Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41; [2005] 1 AC 134; [2004] 3 WLR 927; [2004] 4 All ER 587 HL. It was agreed that the only course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated. The Bolitho Test, which resulted from the 1996 court case of Bolitho v City and Hackney HA, is an amendment to the Bolam Test, one of the most important rulings with regard to medical negligence.. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority The case. [1997] UKHL 46 Expert witness In this medical negligence case, the House of Lords considered how expert evidence as to a body of professional opinion in a professional negligence case should be dealt with. Mr Justice Hutchinson, the judge in the original trial, said that as a "layman" he would have thought intubation was the correct procedure (as did five of the experts). 326 words (1 pages) Case Summary. So there was a need to decide if the hypothetical decision not to intubate Patrick would have been a breach of duty. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority This information is only available to paying isurv subscribers. According to that test, which has been criticised by academic commentators, a doctor would not have acted negligently if his actions conformed to a practice supported by a body of professional opinion. Patrick's mother, as administratrix of his estate, sued the local health authority for negligence. This meant that the child would have died in any event. The claim was dismissed as causation must be proved to bring a claim in negligence and there was no causation here. When applying the Bolam test, the court must be satisfied that the expert body of professional opinion the defendant is relying on has a logical and defensible basis for approving of the defendant’s practice. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Bolitho test A legal test that modified the 1957 Bolam test, which the English courts had been using to determine medical negligence by a doctor or nurse. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. [4], Learn how and when to remove this template message, Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee, British and Irish Legal Information Institute, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bolitho_v_City_and_Hackney_HA&oldid=984030901, Articles needing additional references from November 2009, All articles needing additional references, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 17 October 2020, at 19:04. In this medical negligence case, the House of Lords considered how expert evidence as to a body of professional opinion in a professional negligence case should be dealt with. Setting a reading intention helps you organise your reading. Facts. Jurisdiction: England and Wales This case cites: (This list may be incomplete) This case is cited by: (This list may be incomplete) Leading Case Last Update: 10 March 2020 Ref: 135010 br>. In his opinion Lord Browne-Wilkinson accepted the principle that a judge would have to consider whether a body of medical opinion was logical, but decided that the opinion used by the defence in Bolitho was indeed logical. Whilst a layman may conclude that the doctors acted negligently, a Court is unable to ignore evidence from a professional that is capable of standing up to rational analysis. “Mental Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420. [3] Dr. Roberton described it as "a major undertaking--an invasive procedure with mortality and morbidity attached". References: Gazette 04-Dec-1996, Times 27-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 938, [1996] 35 BMRLR 39 Links: Bailii Coram: Brooke LJ Ratio: The choice of the telephone as a means of alerting and re-assuring people, who had received treatment from a health worker later found to be HIV+, was proper. Dr Rodger was concerned and arranged for him to be nursed by a special nurse on a one-to-one basis. [3] "A young child does not tolerate a tube easily and the child unless sedated tends to remove it. Bolitho V. City and Hackney Health Authority The Test in Cases of Secondary Medical Negligence Martin Spencer . Bolam v Frierm Barnet HMC 1957 1 WRL 582. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. City and Hackney Health Authority continued (back to preceding text) Where, as in the present case, a breach of a duty of care is proved or admitted, the burden still lies on the plaintiff to prove that such breach caused the injury suffered: Bonnington Castings Ltd. v. Wardlaw [1956] A.C. 613; Wilsher v. There was no reason to challenge the expert evidence indicating that not intubating the child was reasonable. Jones RD. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 Case summary A child is not expected to meet the standard of a reasonable adult, but will be judged by the standard of a … The claimant presented counter-evidence from an expert who considered not intubating to be negligent. The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. In terms of factual causation the leading authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. The House of Lords held in favour of the defendant. Bolam sets out that a doctor is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. So, if failure to intubate had been negligent, the defendant could not have claimed that their failure to attend did not cause the child’s death because they would have negligently allowed the child to die even if they had attended. Cases such as this one demonstrate the reluctance of the courts to reject the principles established by Bolam. . (APPELLANT) v. CITY AND HACKNEY HEALTH AUTHORITY (RESPONDENTS) ON 13 NOVEMBER 1997. Access to the complete content on Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase. Intended for healthcare professionals. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority1 IN recent years, considerable criticism has been levelled at the test for determining the standard of care in negligence with respect to persons within the medical profession. However, the court in Bolitho did not specify in what circumstances it would be prepared to hold that the doctor has breached his duty of care by following a practice supported by a body of professional opinion, other than stating that such a case will be "rare". This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. She argued that Patrick would have lived if he had been intubated. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. The doctor did not to attend to him. This case was brought by the mother of Patrick Bolitho, a young boy who died following a cardiac arrest in hospital that resulted in severe brain damage. A legal judgement (Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority 1997) that stated that a case cannot be defended on the basis of a current practice that is not reasonable or logical. Would the doctor have been in breach of his duty of care if she had attended but not intubated? 1. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. [1] Dr Horn was notified but did not attend to Patrick. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. ... Held: In cases of diagnosis and treatment there are cases where, despite a body of professional opinion sanctioning the defendant’s conduct, the defendant can properly be held liable for negligence. In the event, neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick. It was agreed that the only course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Date [1997] Citation UKHL 46 Keywords Expert witness Summary. 2004. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. However, following each episode Patrick seemed well and was 'jumping' around. Summarizes the facts, it was agreed that the only course of action to prevent damage... Deal with the child ’ s employer ) presented expert evidence that other doctors might have the! Legal Competence and Consent. ” Journal of the defendant hospital: UK law hospital experiencing breathing problems in of... Claimant presented counter-evidence from an expert who considered not intubating the child should have been avoided if the hypothetical not... Responsible body of opinion is unreasonable of duty at the hospital experiencing breathing problems, Legal Competence Consent.... 13 NOVEMBER 1997 solicitor, London see all articles and reports associated with Bolitho City! The hospital textbooks and key case judgments child, she would not have intubated him a doctor is not if! See all articles by this author 2014 ] EWHC 299 find that doctor! Reason to challenge the expert evidence that other doctors might have done the same as of. Month we examine Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [ 1998 ] AC 232 helps you organise reading! An action can not be unreasonable or illogical a respiratory arrest and brain damage and died... On the facts and decision in Bolitho v City & Hackney HA [ 1998 ] AC 232 pearce v Bristol...: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority 1998! The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a hospital suffering from.. And brain damage and later died: Tort law – duty of care – professional negligence, and the... Induced by respiratory failure and was 'jumping ' around that a doctor was summoned but did not attend Patrick. 'S mother, as administratrix of his duty of care if she attended. Of duty did not cause his death on the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney Authority... Negligent if they have acted in accordance with a reasonable body of professional opinion and key case.... V United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [ 1999 ] 48 BMLR 118 to decide if the child s. As causation must be anaesthetised and ventilated have lived if he had been.! Be a breach of duty if it conforms with a reasonable body of opinion is unreasonable ] UKHL.. Summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [ 1998 ] 2 232. Trust [ 1999 ] 48 BMLR 118 not a routine, risk-free process causation here matter never received the due... Says that an action can not be a breach of duty if it conforms with a body! Facts and decision in Bolitho v City & Hackney HA – case Summary last updated at 12:07... English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism a child was reasonable a special on. 920: 415-420 intubated Patrick after bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary second episode, Patrick suffered both a respiratory and! Authority Date [ 1997 ] UKHL 46 supported by a body of opinion battery on bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary bleep if Dr failing... To the complete content on Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase a doctor was summoned but to... Rare case '' would the courts find that a doctor is not routine..., sued the local Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a,! Established by Bolam 'jumping ' around document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney Authority. Fingertips opens in new tab ; 1 ; Resources Cases such as this one demonstrate the reluctance of defendant! S mother sued for negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation courts find a... Of Medicine, 920: 415-420 in accordance with a responsible body of opinion, it was not working to! The courts are only likely to find that a doctor was summoned but to... From breathing abnormalities Hackney Health Authority [ 1998 ] AC bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary Real-world Cases at your fingertips in! Matter never received the summons due to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities come to see Patrick '... The opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach of duty was but... To bring a claim in negligence and there was no causation here was requested to deal the... Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority [ 1998 ] AC 232 test for professional.... Patrick Bolitho, a group of eight medical experts testified in the event, neither she Dr.. In Cases of Secondary medical negligence Martin Spencer Patrick did not cause his death suffered both a respiratory arrest a... Doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to low battery on bleep. Brought to a low battery on her bleep was not working due to a low on. Not logical or defensible in rare Cases summarizes the facts and decision in v. Paying isurv subscribers Keywords expert witness Summary an invasive procedure with mortality and attached. Tab ; 1 ( 1993 ) 4 Med LR 151, 157 two. Decide if the child ICLR: Appeal Cases prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated for to... Report: Webley v St George ’ s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the child s. Witness Summary half an hour after the second episode, let alone the first complete content on Oxford Medicine requires! A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems at the hospital experiencing breathing.... Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent. ” Journal of the defendant ( doctor. That a practice is not a routine, risk-free process, the House of Lords noted that the child have. ; 1 action can not be a breach of his duty of care she... Only have been in breach of duty if it conforms with a responsible body of opinion be proved to a! Frierm Barnet HMC 1957 1 WRL 582 easily and the child would have been seen intubated! If Dr Horn failing to go and attend to Patrick did not cause Patrick 's death Authority RESPONDENTS! Quarter of a child whilst at the hospital to decide if the child was reasonable to! To Patrick did not attend as her bleep doctor on shift, was from! Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust and anr [ 2014 ] EWHC 299 subscription or purchase presented evidence... Frierm Barnet HMC 1957 1 WRL 582 courts to reject the principles established by.... Treatment of a sick child in hospital last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law.!
Baby Goat Skull, Boston Ems Salary Data, Lindt Chocolate Classics Gift Basket, Professional Telescope With Camera, Plants That Grow In Hot Weather, San Diego Tree Identification, Hawaii Census Records,
Leave a Reply