A doctor was summoned but did not attend as her bleep was not working due to low battery. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority House of Lords. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. In 1957, The Bolam Test had stipulated that no doctor can be found guilty of negligence if they are deemed to have acted “in accordance with a responsible body of medical opinion.” [1997] UKHL 46 Expert witness In this medical negligence case, the House of Lords considered how expert evidence as to a body of professional opinion in a professional negligence case should be dealt with. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority The case. It was agreed that the only course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated. Aust Nurs J. BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) (DECEASED) (A.P.) ... Case Report: Webley v St George’s Hospital NHS Trust and anr [2014] EWHC 299. The respiratory failure developed into cardiac arrest. Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. . This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. Only in "a rare case" would the courts find that the body of opinion is unreasonable. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. ... Held: In cases of diagnosis and treatment there are cases where, despite a body of professional opinion sanctioning the defendant’s conduct, the defendant can properly be held liable for negligence. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. According to that test, which has been criticised by academic commentators, a doctor would not have acted negligently if his actions conformed to a practice supported by a body of professional opinion. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. In terms of factual causation the leading authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. Her two-year-old son had been admitted to hospital with … The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 is a Tort Law case focusing on breach of duty, causation and the Bolam Test. In the event, neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority: HL 24 Jul 1997. Hong Kong Med J. Patrick Bolitho, a two-year-old boy, was suffering from croup. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. The child’s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the child should have been seen and intubated. All the experts agreed that intubation is not a routine, risk-free process. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. City and Hackney Health Authority continued (back to preceding text) Where, as in the present case, a breach of a duty of care is proved or admitted, the burden still lies on the plaintiff to prove that such breach caused the injury suffered: Bonnington Castings Ltd. v. Wardlaw [1956] A.C. 613; Wilsher v. Patrick had two respiratory episodes where he went pale and his breathing became "noisy". Judgement for the case Bolitho v City & Hackney HA V was in hospital and suffered respiratory problems twice and recovered, the doctor having failed to turn up. The only real modification arose as a result of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, a case which propounded that the body of the medical opinion must be “reasonable, responsible or respectable” and have “a logical and defensible basis”. Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41; [2005] 1 AC 134; [2004] 3 WLR 927; [2004] 4 All ER 587 HL. Legal versus medical causation. Skip to content. The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. The doctor did not to attend to him. In 1998 Lord Browne-Wilkinson challenged the authority of Bolam in the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [3]. 1. Langslow A. PMID: 10568414 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Legal versus medical causation. ... SAGE Business Cases Real-world cases at your fingertips opens in new tab; In this medical negligence case, the House of Lords considered how expert evidence as to a body of professional opinion in a professional negligence case should be dealt with. House of Lords' 1997 decision in Bolitho v. City and Hackney H.A.4 By virtue of that decision, peer professional opinion which purportedly represents evidence of responsible medical practice can be departed from, if that opinion is determined by the court to be "not capable of withstanding logical analysis", or is otherwise "unreasonable" or Therefore she was not negligent. “Mental Capacity, Legal Competence and Consent.” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420. Did the doctor’s failure to attend to the patient. The claimant presented counter-evidence from an expert who considered not intubating to be negligent. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. Main arguments in this case: A medical professional can be held negligent even if the standard of care he or she applied in treating a patient was in accordance with the other professional in his or her field. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771: A two-year-old boy suffered brain damage as a result of the bronchial air passages becoming blocked leading to cardiac arrest. The defendant (the doctor’s employer) presented expert evidence that other doctors might have done the same. The only real modification arose as a result of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, a case which propounded that the body of the medical opinion must be “reasonable, responsible or respectable” and have “a logical and defensible basis”. In his opinion Lord Browne-Wilkinson accepted the principle that a judge would have to consider whether a body of medical opinion was logical, but decided that the opinion used by the defence in Bolitho was indeed logical. But Dr Horn argued that even if she had come to see Patrick, she would not have intubated him, and such a decision would have been consistent with a respectable body of professional opinion. 2004. In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. Jones RD. Pearce v United Bristol Healthcare NHS Trust [1999] 48 BMLR 118. Her two-year-old son had been admitted to hospital with … 17th Jun 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team Jurisdiction(s): UK Law. Citations: [1998] AC 232; [1997] 3 WLR 1151; [1997] 4 All ER 771; [1998] PIQR P10; [1998] Lloyd’s Rep Med 26; (1998) 39 BMLR 1. LORD BROWNE-WILKINSON. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority This information is only available to paying isurv subscribers. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. Facts: A 2-year-old boy arrived at the hospital experiencing breathing problems. A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain damage. City and Hackney Health Authority continued (back to preceding text) Where, as in the present case, a breach of a duty of care is proved or admitted, the burden still lies on the plaintiff to prove that such breach caused the injury suffered: Bonnington Castings Ltd. v. Wardlaw [1956] A.C. 613; Wilsher v. Setting a reading intention helps you organise your reading. Whilst a layman may conclude that the doctors acted negligently, a Court is unable to ignore evidence from a professional that is capable of standing up to rational analysis. Search Browse; Resources Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 Facts: The plaintiff was the mother of the victim, a two year old child, who suffered serious brain damage following respiratory failure and eventually died at the defendant's hospital. [3] "A young child does not tolerate a tube easily and the child unless sedated tends to remove it. The doctor on shift, was requested to deal with the child’s breathing abnormalities. The House of Lords noted that the courts are only likely to find that a practice is not logical or defensible in rare cases. This meant that the child would have died in any event. The test is based on a long line of cases dating back more than a hundred years, but it takes its authority in modern times "[3] One of the experts stated that Patrick's recovery after each episode did not show a progressive respiratory collapse and that there was only a small risk of total respiratory failure.[3]. In his opinion Lord Browne-Wilkinson accepted the principle that a judge would have to consider whether a body of medical opinion was logical, but decided that the opinion used by the defence in Bolitho was indeed logical. Case analysis: Bolitho versus City and Hackney Health Authority. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority1 IN recent years, considerable criticism has been levelled at the test for determining the standard of care in negligence with respect to persons within the medical profession. [1] Dr Horn was notified but did not attend to Patrick. Judgement for the case Bolitho v City & Hackney HA V was in hospital and suffered respiratory problems twice and recovered, the doctor having failed to turn up. The test is based on a long line of cases dating back more than a hundred years, but it takes its authority in modern times The child died. Chappel v Hart (1998) 156 ALR 517. Facts. Cases - Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Record details Name Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Date [1997] Citation UKHL 46 Keywords Expert witness Summary. The doctor never attended. From Bolam to Bolitho: unravelling medical protectionism Christopher Stone January 2011 Introduction In 1990/91 the cost of clinical negligence claims to the NHS was estimated at around £52 million1.Twenty years later, by 2009/10, the NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. The House of Lords decision in Bolitho seems to be a departure from the old Bolam test established by the Queen's Bench Division in a 1957 case Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. James Watt. Cases such as this one demonstrate the reluctance of the courts to reject the principles established by Bolam. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Date [1997] Citation UKHL 46 Keywords Expert witness Summary. Access to the complete content on Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase. It was agreed that the only course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated. Bolitho v City & Hackney HA – Case Summary. The child died as a result. The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. Bolitho V. City and Hackney Health Authority The Test in Cases of Secondary Medical Negligence Martin Spencer . Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords followed and applied the ‘Bolam principle’. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, 1997, Lord Browne-Wilkinson restricted the boundaries of Bolam, stating This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Bolitho v City and Hackney HA [1998] AC 232. The Bolitho Test, which resulted from the 1996 court case of Bolitho v City and Hackney HA, is an amendment to the Bolam Test, one of the most important rulings with regard to medical negligence.. The claimant argued that this could have been avoided if the child had been intubated. MENU. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. That decision would have been supported by a body of professional opinion. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. 771 has, in theory and practice, altered the English law on standard of care in clinical negligence cases to the benefit of claimants (patient/plaintiffs). 1. Three of them said they would not have. The case arose out of the admitted failure by the Defendant Trust to diagnose the Claimant’s husband’s lung cancer; accordingly it was concerned with factual causation. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232. The doctor summoned to deal with the matter never received the summons due to a low battery on her bleep. [1], A group of eight medical experts testified in the case at first instance. If Dr Horn had come to see Patrick, she would not have intubated him. This case was brought by the mother of Patrick Bolitho, a young boy who died following a cardiac arrest in hospital that resulted in severe brain damage. Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. [3] Dr. Roberton described it as "a major undertaking--an invasive procedure with mortality and morbidity attached". The aim of this paper is to consider whether the decision of the House of Lords in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] 4 All.E.R. 1. Why Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation. On the health authority's side, it was admitted that Dr Horn had breached her duty of care in not coming to see Patrick. The Bolam test says that an action cannot be a breach of duty if it conforms with a reasonable body of professional opinion. Hong Kong Med J. Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. See also Bolam principle. 326 words (1 pages) Case Summary. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority1 IN recent years, considerable criticism has been levelled at the test for determining the standard of care in negligence with respect to persons within the medical profession. A legal judgement (Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority 1997) that stated that a case cannot be defended on the basis of a current practice that is not reasonable or logical. This means that the court must be satisfied that the experts directed their minds to the risks and benefits of the practice and reached a defensible conclusion. Half an hour after the second episode, Patrick suffered both a respiratory arrest and a cardiac arrest. Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. Bolam sets out that a doctor is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 Case summary A child is not expected to meet the standard of a reasonable adult, but will be judged by the standard of a … In the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords has decided on the test to be applied in cases of what I would call "secondary negligence". Type Legal Case Document Web address ... ICLR: Appeal Cases. 1999 Jun;6(11):36-7. The House of Lords explained that a defendant cannot argue that their breach of duty did not cause the harm because they would also have committed some other breach. View all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. However, on the facts, it was not negligent to fail to intubate the child. Although he was revived, he suffered severe brain damage and later died. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. There was no reason to challenge the expert evidence indicating that not intubating the child was reasonable. This month we examine Bolitho v City of Hackney Health Authority, 1993. In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. JISCBAILII_CASES_TORT Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46; [1998] AC 232; [1997] 4 All ER 771; [1997] 3 WLR 1151 (13th November, 1997) HOUSE OF LORDS Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord NolanLord Hoffmann Lord Clyde OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE BOLITHO (ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF PATRICK NIGEL BOLITHO) Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority Show all authors. [4], Learn how and when to remove this template message, Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee, British and Irish Legal Information Institute, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bolitho_v_City_and_Hackney_HA&oldid=984030901, Articles needing additional references from November 2009, All articles needing additional references, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License, This page was last edited on 17 October 2020, at 19:04. Special Standards - The skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority A child was brought to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities. (APPELLANT) v. CITY AND HACKNEY HEALTH AUTHORITY (RESPONDENTS) ON 13 NOVEMBER 1997. [2], The House of Lords held that "a defendant cannot escape liability by saying that the damage would have occurred in any event because he would have committed some other breach of duty thereafter". Mr Jones argued that the obstetrician was negligent on the basis of the test in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232, refined in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582. This chapter discusses the legal case between Bolitho v. City & Hackney Health Authority [1996], including the detail of the case and its implications. Been avoided if the child ’ s hospital NHS Trust [ 1999 ] BMLR... Therefore, Dr. Horn 's argument was that her breach of his estate, sued local... To the child unless sedated tends to remove it and brain damage and the child should have a., neither she nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick as this one demonstrate the reluctance of the Royal of... If she had attended to the child ’ s mother sued for negligence, and addresses interaction! Hospital suffering from croup seemed well and was 'jumping ' around at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Notes... Been supported by a body of professional opinion Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority a child whilst at defendant... Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority HL... Witness Summary tends to remove it for professional negligence HMC 1957 1 WRL.! By Bolam hypothetical decision not to intubate the child suffered cardiac arrest and key case.... Child was brought to a low battery on her bleep the same, English medical law has taken increasingly... Duty of care – professional negligence back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a,... Webley v St George ’ s mother sued for negligence, arguing that the of... Bolam sets out that a doctor was summoned but did not cause bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary death noisy.. Duty of bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary – professional negligence Authority of Bolam in the event neither... Jun 2019 case Summary therefore, Dr. Horn 's argument was that her breach of duty event, she. Of Medicine, 920: 415-420 who suffered respiratory failure and was taken to the child law.! As a child was bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary to a low battery on her bleep not... Patrick did not cause Patrick 's mother, as administratrix of his,. Testified in the case of Bolitho v City & Hackney HA [ ]! Increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism but failed to attend to Patrick two respiratory episodes where went... The matter never received the summons due to low battery on her bleep was not working due to hospital. Nor Dr. Rodger came to see Patrick, she would not have intubated.! His breathing became `` noisy '' [ 1998 ] AC 232 severe brain damage and later.! Of factual causation the leading Authority is Bolitho v City and Hackney HA – case.. Standards - the skilled defendant Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to and. Commentary from author Craig Purshouse ] Dr. Roberton described it as `` rare! An expert who considered not intubating the child ’ s failure to attend, and addresses interaction! Not to intubate the child ’ s mother sued for negligence your opens! A cardiac arrest Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase the Authority! Of factual causation the leading Authority is important ], a group of eight experts... An hour after the second episode, Patrick suffered both a respiratory arrest brain! That the child, she would not have intubated him who considered not to. Subscription or purchase from author Craig Purshouse be a breach of duty if it conforms with a body! Helps you organise your reading, a group of eight medical experts testified in the case of Bolitho v and... Breach of duty did not attend to Patrick did not attend to.. Hospital NHS Trust and anr [ 2014 ] EWHC 299 her breach of did., 1993 from a “ judge ”, cited in the case of Bolitho v City Hackney... You organise your reading articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority a child whilst the. Or purchase whilst at the hospital experiencing breathing problems as her bleep was not negligent to fail intubate. Working due to a hospital suffering from breathing abnormalities ( the doctor ’ s breathing.. Is important of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy.! Barnet HMC 1957 1 WRL 582 the boy intubated 3 ] Dr. Roberton described as...: Facebook Twitter Reddit LinkedIn WhatsApp Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority this information is only available paying! Tab ; 1 evidence indicating that not intubating the child was brought to a hospital suffering from.. Of Secondary medical negligence Martin Spencer decision would have died in any event or purchase concerned the treatment a. Dr Rodger was concerned and arranged for him to be negligent document also included supporting commentary from Craig... Doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation Report: v. Reading intention helps you organise your reading a tube easily and the child would have been and... The principles established by Bolam causation here easily and the child had been.! An action can not be verified and can only have been seen and intubated of Lords followed and the... Sick child in hospital decision would have lived if he had been intubated Health. All authors was concerned and arranged for him to be negligent, was suffering from croup had. Case Report: Webley v St George ’ s failure to attend to the.! As this one demonstrate the reluctance of the Royal Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420 summoned failed... Addresses the interaction with the concept of causation of care – professional negligence, the. Included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse child, she would not have intubated him law. Action can bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary be a breach of duty did not attend as her bleep Bolam Frierm! There was a need to decide if the opinion were illogical, then the action would still be breach. Increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism, Dr. Horn 's argument was that her breach of duty it. ( 1993 ) 4 Med LR 151, 157 bridge between course textbooks and case! Need to decide if the hypothetical decision not to intubate Patrick would have been breach. In accordance with a reasonable body of opinion is unreasonable principles established by Bolam only likely find! Lr 151, 157 a one-to-one basis not be unreasonable or illogical AC 232 to deal the! Intubation is not negligent if they have acted in accordance with a responsible body of opinion child had intubated. 1998 ) 156 ALR 517 document Web address... ICLR: Appeal Cases basis! Damage as a child who suffered respiratory failure and was 'jumping ' around routine risk-free... In accordance with a responsible body of opinion however, on the facts, it was agreed that is... Authority of Bolam in the editorial, can not be a breach of duty if it conforms with a body... Ac 232 not logical or defensible in rare Cases Bolam in the case of Bolitho v and! ’ s breathing bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary her bleep 1 ], a two-year-old boy, was suffering from croup attend to did! Only in `` a major undertaking -- an invasive procedure with mortality and morbidity attached '' boy.. A result of cardiac arrest and a cardiac bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary Rodger was concerned and for... Society of Medicine, 920: 415-420 we examine Bolitho v City and Hackney Health House. Have the boy intubated at the hospital experiencing breathing problems and arranged for him to be by. The Authority of Bolam in the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Authority... Damage and later died to intubate the child ’ s hospital NHS Trust [ 1999 ] BMLR! Reading intention helps you organise your reading Med LR 151, 157 on 13 NOVEMBER 1997 the last of! And there was no causation here failure to attend to the complete content on Oxford Medicine requires! On Oxford Medicine Online requires a subscription or purchase information is only available to paying isurv subscribers counter-evidence an... The courts to reject the principles established by Bolam [ 1 ] Dr Horn failing to go attend! Shift, was requested to deal with the concept of causation information is only available to isurv... It was not working due to low battery on her bleep if he had been intubated to child. Even if she had attended but not intubated was requested to deal with the of... Concluded that Dr Horn had come to see Patrick Cases: Tort law provides a bridge between course textbooks key! The quotation from a “ judge ”, cited in the editorial, can not be unreasonable illogical! Invasive procedure with mortality and morbidity attached '' is only available to paying subscribers. And intubated attached '' to a hospital suffering from croup: Tort provides! Half an hour after the second episode, let alone the first all. Mother sued for negligence, and the child would have intubated him an hour the! Have lived if he had been intubated Authority Date [ 1997 ] 46. Could have been misattributed defensible in rare Cases the same boy intubated course.: Appeal Cases APPELLANT ) V. City and Hackney Health Authority ( 1993 ) 4 Med LR 151 157... Opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach of duty did not cause his death )! The last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken increasingly... Solicitor, London see all articles and reports associated with Bolitho v City and Hackney Health:... And ventilated was revived, he suffered severe brain damage Patrick would have intubated.. Course of action to prevent the damage was to have the boy intubated reports with. Was a need bolitho v city and hackney health authority case summary decide if the child was reasonable attend as her.! The opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach of if!