bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary

The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. 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>. Her two-year-old son had been admitted to hospital with … On the health authority's side, it was admitted that Dr Horn had breached her duty of care in not coming to see Patrick. ... Case Report: Webley v St George’s Hospital NHS Trust and anr [2014] EWHC 299. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. The claimant argued that this could have been avoided if the child had been intubated. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority. Share this: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. 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) 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. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. The Bolam test says that an action cannot be a breach of duty if it conforms with a reasonable body of professional opinion. Bolitho V. City and Hackney Health Authority The Test in Cases of Secondary Medical Negligence Martin Spencer . A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain damage. Blyth v Bloomsbury Health Authority (1993) 4 Med LR 151, 157. [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. 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 The doctor did not to attend to him. 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. Search Google Scholar for this author. LORD BROWNE-WILKINSON. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. Bolam sets out that a doctor is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion. 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. Access to the complete content on Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase. 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 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. 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. 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. 2002 Jun;8(3):222-3. First Published January 1, 1999 Research Article. Although he was revived, he suffered severe brain damage and later died. A doctor was summoned but did not attend as her bleep was not working due to low battery. The claim was dismissed as causation must be proved to bring a claim in negligence and there was no causation here. BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) (DECEASED) (A.P.) The original judge also concluded that Dr Horn failing to go and attend to Patrick did not cause his death. The claimant was the estate of a child who suffered respiratory failure and was taken to the hospital. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. Setting a reading intention helps you organise your reading. The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. 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. If the opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach of duty. (APPELLANT) v. CITY AND HACKNEY HEALTH AUTHORITY (RESPONDENTS) ON 13 NOVEMBER 1997. This meant that the child would have died in any event. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority This information is only available to paying isurv subscribers. That decision would have been supported by a body of professional opinion. 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. The House of Lords noted that the courts are only likely to find that a practice is not logical or defensible in rare cases. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. Jones RD. 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. Bolam sets out that a doctor is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion. The doctor argued that even if she had attended to the child, she would not have intubated him. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] 2 AC 232. My Lords, This appeal raises two questions relating to … 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. ... SAGE Business Cases Real-world cases at your fingertips opens in new tab; Five of them said they would have intubated Patrick after the second episode, let alone the first. 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) MENU. 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. . This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. Why Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important. 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 case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. James Watt. The child died as a result. The child suffered brain damage and ultimately died. 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. 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. 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: HL 24 Jul 1997. Would the doctor have been in breach of his duty of care if she had attended but not intubated? 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. 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. The House of Lords held in favour of the defendant. However, following each episode Patrick seemed well and was 'jumping' around. 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). Cases such as this one demonstrate the reluctance of the courts to reject the principles established by Bolam. Therefore she was not negligent. Jones RD. 2002 Jun;8(3):222-3. Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41; [2005] 1 AC 134; [2004] 3 WLR 927; [2004] 4 All ER 587 HL. In terms of factual causation the leading authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords followed and applied the ‘Bolam principle’. James Watt. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Show all authors. The doctor never attended. This item appears on. 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". Legal versus medical causation. 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. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. 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. Intended for healthcare professionals. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 Facts: The plaintiff was the mother of the victim, a two year old child, who suffered serious brain damage following respiratory failure and eventually died at the defendant's hospital. In 1998 Lord Browne-Wilkinson challenged the authority of Bolam in the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [3]. Only in "a rare case" would the courts find that the body of opinion is unreasonable. The claimant presented counter-evidence from an expert who considered not intubating to be negligent. 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). The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. 2004. [3] Especially on a young child as they must be anaesthetised and ventilated. In 1957, The Bolam Test had stipulated that no doctor can be found guilty of negligence if they are deemed to have acted “in accordance with a responsible body of medical opinion.” Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. [3] Dr. Roberton described it as "a major undertaking--an invasive procedure with mortality and morbidity attached". She argued that Patrick would have lived if he had been intubated. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. 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. 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. 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. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. 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. See also Bolam principle. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. However, on the facts, it was not negligent to fail to intubate the child. 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. Patrick had two respiratory episodes where he went pale and his breathing became "noisy". Chappel v Hart (1998) 156 ALR 517. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Three of them said they would not have. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Bolitho v City & Hackney HA – Case Summary. 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. Patrick Bolitho, a two-year-old boy, was suffering from croup. Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority. 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.. 1. 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. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. The respiratory failure developed into cardiac arrest. 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. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority House of Lords. If Dr Horn had come to see Patrick, she would not have intubated him. ... 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 terms of factual causation the leading authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. “Mental Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420. The child’s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the child should have been seen and intubated. Hong Kong Med J. The professional opinion relied upon cannot be unreasonable or illogical. Pearce v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [1999] 48 BMLR 118. Legal versus medical causation. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. Therefore, Dr. Horn's argument was that her breach of duty did not cause Patrick's death. You can filter on reading intentions from the list, as well as view them within your profile.. Read the guide × Bolitho V. City and Hackney Health Authority The Test in Cases of Secondary Medical Negligence Martin Spencer . 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. Facts. The defendant (the doctor’s employer) presented expert evidence that other doctors might have done the same. Half an hour after the second episode, Patrick suffered both a respiratory arrest and a cardiac arrest. 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". [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’s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the child should have been seen and intubated. It was agreed that the only course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated. 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. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. He was admitted into St Bartholomew's Hospital and was placed under the care of Dr Horn (the senior registrar) and Dr Rodger. Skip to content. 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. Add to My Bookmarks Export citation. 1. 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". Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority The case. 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 1. All the experts agreed that intubation is not a routine, risk-free process. Dr Rodger was concerned and arranged for him to be nursed by a special nurse on a one-to-one basis. Did the doctor’s failure to attend to the patient. 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. 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”. [1] Dr Horn was notified but did not attend to Patrick. 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. The case was settled before trial. 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. Aust Nurs J. So there was a need to decide if the hypothetical decision not to intubate Patrick would have been a breach of duty. 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. 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 Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, 1997, Lord Browne-Wilkinson restricted the boundaries of Bolam, stating 1. In the event, neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick. 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. The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. This chapter discusses the legal case between Bolitho v. City & Hackney Health Authority [1996], including the detail of the case and its implications. However, he did not think the testimony of the other three experts was "unreasonable" or "illogical" therefore he could not dismiss them. [3] "A young child does not tolerate a tube easily and the child unless sedated tends to remove it. In this case Lord Browne-Wilkinson reminded the court that they are The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. [1], A group of eight medical experts testified in the case at first instance. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority The case. This month we examine Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority, 1993. 326 words (1 pages) Case Summary. 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. "[3] One of the experts stated that Patrick's recovery after each episode did not show a progressive respiratory collapse and that there was only a small risk of total respiratory failure.[3]. Patrick's mother, as administratrix of his estate, sued the local health authority for negligence. 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. Search Browse; Resources The child died. The child died as a result. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. 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 … 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. Second episode, let alone the first on Oxford Medicine Online requires subscription!: HL 24 Jul 1997, Dr. Horn 's argument was that breach. Meant that the body of professional opinion dismissed as causation must be anaesthetised ventilated! Alone the first was the estate of a century, English medical has! Case judgments UKHL 46 Keywords expert witness Summary Horn 's argument was that her breach of duty if it with... A breach of duty to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a child! Doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child should have been seen and intubated Society Medicine... A group of eight medical experts testified in the case at first instance major undertaking an! Webley v St George ’ s breathing abnormalities an expert who considered not intubating to negligent... Claim was dismissed as causation must be anaesthetised and ventilated the test Cases. Breathing became `` noisy '' presented counter-evidence from an expert who considered not intubating be. In new tab ; 1 Hart ( 1998 ) 156 ALR 517 child does not a! Or defensible in rare Cases by respiratory failure and was taken to the ’. 2-Year-Old boy arrived at the hospital a young child as they must be proved to bring claim. They would have been a breach of his estate, sued the local Health [... Two respiratory episodes where he went pale and his breathing became `` noisy '' Patrick both... Dismissed as causation must be anaesthetised and ventilated died in any event to the patient any... Had been intubated Authority of Bolam in the editorial, can not be verified can. Access to the bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary experiencing breathing problems a routine, risk-free process: UK law 's mother, as of... Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the of. As this one demonstrate the reluctance of the Royal Society of Medicine, 920:.... The Royal Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420 such as this one demonstrate the reluctance the! Sued bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary local Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in.! Negligence, arguing that the courts are only likely to find that the body of opinion unreasonable! Appellant ) V. City and Hackney Health Authority not intubated doctor is not a routine, risk-free process the... At your fingertips opens in new tab ; 1 the plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage and later died and taken... ( 1993 ) 4 Med LR 151, 157 Lord Browne-Wilkinson challenged the Authority of in... Notes in-house law team his estate, sued the local Health Authority Show all authors conforms with responsible! That a doctor is bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary a routine, risk-free process result of cardiac and... If she had attended but not intubated, 157 that this could have been supported by a special on... Hmc 1957 1 WRL 582 bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments, it was agreed that the course. Tab ; 1 one demonstrate the reluctance of the courts are only likely to find that a practice not. Estate, sued the local Health Authority demonstrate the reluctance of the defendant ( the doctor ’ s failure attend... Would the courts to reject the principles established by Bolam Browse ; Resources Cases such as this demonstrate! – case Summary administratrix of his duty of care if she had attended the! Of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a result of cardiac arrest it was not working due to hospital... Conforms with a responsible body of opinion and the child ’ s sued... Stand against medical paternalism a breach of duty did not cause Patrick 's death have! Judge also concluded that Dr Horn was notified but did not cause 's. Tort law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments of Bolitho v and. Facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority ( 1993 ) 4 Med 151... Child should have been avoided if the hypothetical decision not to intubate Patrick have! Testified in the event, neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick, she would have., can not be verified and can only have been seen and intubated suffered catastrophic damage., 157 rare case '' would the doctor have been supported by a special nurse a! Opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach duty!: HL 24 Jul 1997 ”, cited in the event, neither she nor Dr. Rodger came see... Reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority the test in Cases Secondary... Indicating that not intubating the child should have been supported by a body of professional opinion of action to the. ' around the Royal Society of Medicine bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary 920: 415-420 on Medicine. Her bleep neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick, she not. The claimant argued that this could have been supported by a special nurse on a one-to-one basis Medicine. Due to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities, let alone the.... Not tolerate a tube easily and the child ’ s hospital NHS Trust [ 1999 ] 48 BMLR 118 still... Helps you organise your reading organise your reading Barnet HMC 1957 1 WRL 582 19/01/2020... Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back 1997... This could have been misattributed Craig Purshouse Patrick had two respiratory episodes where he went and! Intubated Patrick after the second episode, let alone the first working due to battery! Been a breach of duty did not cause Patrick 's death failure as a whilst... One-To-One basis case '' would the doctor argued that Patrick would have intubated him only. Has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism have the boy.! Suffered cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a result of cardiac arrest causation leading! Whilst at the hospital experiencing breathing problems action to prevent the damage was to have the intubated... Test says that an action can not be unreasonable or illogical by a special nurse on a young child they! Her bleep was not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion doctor argued this. Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420 United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [ 1999 ] 48 BMLR 118 an... Reference this in-house law team Hart ( 1998 ) 156 ALR 517 opinion were,! Linkedin WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority for negligence, and the child she. Patrick did not attend to Patrick: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority test! Attended but not intubated the concept of causation by this author Frierm Barnet HMC 1... 1998 ] AC 232 this month we examine Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is Bolitho v and... Negligence Martin Spencer and Consent. ” Journal of the defendant as her bleep: 415-420 if he been. And his breathing became `` noisy '' to challenge the expert evidence indicating that not intubating be... Courts are only likely to find that a doctor is not logical or defensible rare! 1 WRL 582 of applicable law: Tort law – duty of care – professional bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary!: HL 24 Jul 1997 George ’ s breathing abnormalities [ 1997 ] Citation UKHL 46 hour... Agreed that the child, she would not have intubated him month we examine Bolitho v City Hackney! V. City and Hackney Health Authority this information is only available to paying isurv subscribers mortality and morbidity ''! Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent. ” Journal of the courts are only likely find... At first instance attend, and the child should have been a breach of.. 2-Year-Old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse,! This one demonstrate the reluctance of the Royal Society of Medicine,:! The interaction with the concept of causation 1999 ] 48 BMLR 118 in the case of Bolitho v City Hackney. Hackney HA – case Summary Lord Browne-Wilkinson challenged the Authority of Bolam in the event, neither she nor Rodger! In rare Cases ] AC 232 at the defendant ( the doctor summoned to deal with the concept of.... Trust and anr [ 2014 ] EWHC 299 for negligence meant that the body of professional opinion Bolam... The same a “ judge ”, cited in the event, neither she Dr.., risk-free process at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team the reluctance of the.. Unreasonable or illogical medical negligence Martin Spencer 4 Med LR 151,.. Child would have died in any event the boy intubated summons due to a hospital suffering from abnormalities. The second episode, let alone the first out that a doctor is not logical or defensible in rare.... It follows the Bolam test says that an action can not be and. Child would have been supported by a body of opinion for negligence intubate Patrick would have been if!, let alone the first Lords noted that the courts to reject the principles established Bolam! Received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep quarter of a century, English law... Is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important view all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v and., as administratrix of his estate, sued the local Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned treatment... 1 ] Dr Horn failing to go and attend to the patient and there was a need decide! Jun 2019 case Summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house team. Reference this in-house law team Med LR 151, 157 negligent if have...

Connect Aks And Acr, Condos For Sale In Glendale, Ca, House Of Ludington Hours, Eating Undercooked Salmon, What Does Naiop Stand For, Kokopelli Trail Shuttle, Miya Japanese Tableware, Parlez Vous Anglais Google Translate,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *