Introduction The tragic facts of the case of Traylor were largely undisputed: on the 8th of February 2015, Marc Traylor (“MT”) experienced a psychotic episode. Having armed himself with two knives, he went to his daughter, Kitanna Traylor’s room (“KT”) and threatened to stab her (para 1, 38). KT’s sister went to find MT’s father, Peter […]
The case of Watson involved disputed factual issues relating to causation, with the central question being whether the Defendant’s admitted breach of duty in failing to include a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) in the differential diagnosis and in turn to prescribe Aspirin would have prevented the Claimant suffering a stroke several months later. The judgment […]
The judgment in Radia v Marks is essential reading for those who instruct experts in litigation. It contains an application of the principles set out in Khan v Meadows concerning the scope of a duty of care owed by expert witnesses to litigants.
At first blush, the case of Dalchow looks like a fairly orthodox clinical negligence claim (where the Claimant won on breach of duty but lost on causation). However, the analysis of the trial judge (particularly on matters of law) is of particular interest, including: A ‘first principles’ analysis of the approach that should be taken […]
The Court of Appeal has now handed down judgment in the conjoined appeals of Paul v Wolverhampton, Polmear v Cornwall and Purchase v Dr Ahmed. The appeals centre upon the ‘secondary victim’ criteria for psychiatric injury in Clinical Negligence claims, with the Court of Appeal finding itself bound by its decision in Taylor v A Novo […]
