No Place for the Best Interests Test in Cases of Brain Stem Death

Judges in the Family Division and the Court of Protection are regularly asked to perform the unenviable task of balancing the pros and cons of continuing life-sustaining treatment. The Judge’s decision determines whether the person at the heart of those proceedings should live or die. As the Supreme Court confirmed in a number of appeals […]

Read More… from No Place for the Best Interests Test in Cases of Brain Stem Death

Stepping on from Montgomery: AXM v. Southampton NHS Trust

On 2 December 2019 Martin Spencer J approved a settlement of £1.35m in this cerebral palsy case which was compromised without any concession of liability from the Defendant. I represented the Claimant[1]. A review of the facts highlights the continuing uncertainties about how far the decision in Montgomery really goes. At the same time this […]

Read More… from Stepping on from Montgomery: AXM v. Southampton NHS Trust

Nervous shock and the Material Gap: Is Paul v Wolverhampton a problem for nervous shock claimants?

On 4 November 2019 Master Cook struck out a nervous shock claim by the children of Mr Paul who collapsed and died from an untreated heart condition whilst out on a shopping trip with them in the centre of Wolverhampton. This is the latest skirmish in a long running battle between claimants and defendants over […]

Read More… from Nervous shock and the Material Gap: Is Paul v Wolverhampton a problem for nervous shock claimants?

Ten point checklist for finalising expert reports for exchange

The recent case of Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals [2019] EWHC 1276 QB is a useful reminder of the pitfalls of finalising expert reports for disclosure. The Judge criticised the Claimant’s expert neurosurgeon, in a number of respects, most of which stemmed from his disclosed report predating the pleadings and therefore not taking account of […]

Read More… from Ten point checklist for finalising expert reports for exchange