§ PUBLISHED JUDGMENT · 2024

Runciman v University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust

[2024] EWHC 1800 (KB)·High Court (King's Bench Division)·12 July 2024

A widower claimed that doctors at Southampton General misdiagnosed his wife's rare cerebral venous thrombosis as a stroke, gave her clot-busting drugs and delayed the correct treatment, leading to her death. The judge found the clinicians acted reasonably on the presentation and that even earlier correct treatment would probably not have saved her.

Outcome

Claim failed

Sum stated in judgment

Not stated

Claim type

Fatal Medical Negligence

Decided

Liability decided at trial

G
ClaimGavel Assistant
● Online · Fatal Medical Negligence · free & confidential
FREE
TELL US WHAT HAPPENED — TYPE HERE

Start typing — your likely claim, value and time limit appear here.

Describe what happened (a sentence or two) to begin.

Free · confidential · not legal adviceEngland

§ WHAT HAPPENED

The facts, in brief.

Defendant: University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · this trust’s claims data

Injury: Death from cerebral venous sinus thrombosis after it was treated as an arterial ischaemic stroke with thrombolysis

Specialty: Stroke medicine / Neurology · England

§ WHAT THE COURT SAID

In the judgment’s own words.

“there was no breach of duty on the part of the Defendant's treating clinicians”

The money

Claim brought under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and Fatal Accidents Act 1976 and valued at £284,643 ([2]); dismissed on both breach and causation.

§ WHY IT MATTERS

What this case shows.

A tragic outcome after a rare condition is missed does not by itself prove negligence; the question is whether a reasonable body of doctors would have acted the same way on the information available. Causation must be proved separately.

About fatal medical negligence claims →

§ MORE FATAL MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE JUDGMENTS

Claim failed

Ritchie v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust

[2026] EWCC 50·2026·Liability decided at trial

A widow brought a dependency and bereavement claim against the hospital after her husband died from an infection picked up during heart surgery. Because he had already settled his own claim in full against the equipment manufacturer while alive, the court held no Fatal Accidents Act claim survived for his dependants.

A dependant's claim under the Fatal Accidents Act only exists if the deceased could still have sued at the moment of death. Settling a claim in the patient's lifetime can extinguish the family's later dependency claim, so settlement terms need careful thought where death is foreseeable.

Claim failed

Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust; Polmear and another v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust; Purchase v Ahmed

[2024] UKSC 1·2024·Appeal decision

Three families sought damages for psychiatric injury after watching a relative die from a condition that doctors had negligently failed to diagnose. The Supreme Court (Lord Burrows dissenting) held that doctors do not owe relatives a duty to protect them from the shock of witnessing a patient's death or medical crisis.

Relatives who develop a psychiatric illness from witnessing a loved one's death caused by medical negligence generally cannot claim as secondary victims. Their remedies are limited to the Fatal Accidents Act dependency and bereavement claims.

Claim failed

Shah v North West London Hospital NHS Trust

[2013] EWHC 4088 (QB)·2013·Liability and damages decided at trial

A widower and four children claimed after Mrs Shah, who had collapsed with leg weakness days after giving birth, died from an undetected arterial tear. The court found the A&E doctor's failure to check leg pulses was not negligent and would not have changed the outcome, so the claim failed.

Fatal claims need proof both that care fell below a reasonable standard and that better care would probably have saved the patient. The judgment nonetheless shows how dependency damages for a spouse and children are built up from the deceased's earnings and services.

All fatal medical negligence judgments →

Contains information licensed under the Open Justice - Licence v2.0. Judgments from Find Case Law, The National Archives. Summaries are ours; amounts only where printed in the judgment.

This guide is general information about the law in England and Wales, not legal advice about your case. ClaimGavel is run by Costart Projects Ltd on behalf of Tomlin & Partners, a specialist medical negligence firm regulated by the SRA. The free assessment on this page is an AI overview to show you roughly where you stand; a solicitor confirms the position in a free, no-obligation conversation.