The plaintiff was given a spinal anaesthetic, but subsequently suffered a serious neurological defect on the right side. The cause was a mystery. The MRI Scan showed a lesion in the thoracic spine which the plaintiff claimed must have been the result of the spinal anaesthetic having been administered at the wrong level. The anaesthetist gave evidence that he had administered it at the lumbar spine. The judge accepted the anaesthetist’s evidence and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims.
Held: The court considered the value of the maxim res ipsa loquitur in professional negligence claims: ‘Res ipsa loquitur is not a principle of law and it does not relate to or raise any presumption. It is merely a guide to help identify when a prima facie case is being made out. Where expert and factual evidence is being called on both sides at trial its usefulness will normally have been long since exhausted.’
Judges:
Hobhouse LJ, Brooke LJ
Citations:
[1998] EWCA Civ 206, [1998] Lloyd’s LR Med 162
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lillywhite 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: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.143684