P v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust: QBD 18 Jun 2004

The claimant, when in mid pregnancy, had a routine abdominal ultra-sound scan. The sonographer could not visualise the foetal bladder, and referred her Leeds General Infirmary. The record of the scan taken there two days later showed the bladder noted under the heading ‘well visualised and appear normal’. This scan had been taken by a specialist registrar. A second ultra-sound scan a month later conducted jointly by the same registrar and the consultant noted that ‘the bladder is seen within the pelvis’. Two further ultra sound scans were taken in which no abnormality of the bladder was noted. In fact the child was born with a condition known as cloacal-exstrophy, a condition in which there is serious deformity resulting in the development of substantial parts of the abdominal content outside the abdominal wall. In that condition there was no bladder to be visualised. the duty of care owed at the Leeds General Infirmary demanded a high standard of care and skill because the scan was ‘a scan with a focus’. He concluded that ‘there is a heavy burden on Leeds when seeking to reconcile its incorrect visualisations with the exercise of all reasonable care and skill.’
Held: The claimant had established her case.


[2004] EWHC 1392 (QB), [2004] Lloyd’s Rep Med 537




England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLillywhite and Another v University College London Hospitals’ NHS Trust CA 7-Dec-2005
The claimant sought damages for severe injuries suffered by their child at birth, and now appealed finding that the doctor had not been negligent. The allegation was simply that the injury could not have occurred but for negligence in the defendant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.236718