Though there is no duty at large to help someone in need of urgent assistance, an ambulance service, by accepting a 999 call, may have accepted a duty to the caller. It remained open to argue as to whether it was fair just and reasonable to impose duty.
Citations:
Times 23-Dec-1998, Gazette 27-Jan-1999, [1998] EWCA Civ 1941
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Kent v Doctor Griffiths, Doctor Roberts, The London Ambulance Service QBD 16-Jul-1999
The claimant suffered a respiratory arrest after an emergency ambulance called by the first defendant, did not arrive for 40 minutes.
Held: the ambulance service was negligenct and liable. The acceptance of the doctor’s request for an . .
Cited by:
See Also – Kent v Doctor Griffiths, Doctor Roberts, The London Ambulance Service QBD 16-Jul-1999
The claimant suffered a respiratory arrest after an emergency ambulance called by the first defendant, did not arrive for 40 minutes.
Held: the ambulance service was negligenct and liable. The acceptance of the doctor’s request for an . .
See Also – Kent v Griffiths and others CA 3-Feb-2000
A doctor attended the home of a patient suffering from an asthma attack and called for an ambulance to take her immediately to hospital. The control replied ‘Okay doctor.’ After 13 minutes the ambulance had not arrived and the patient’s husband made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Negligence, Health Professions
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.145420
