§ PUBLISHED JUDGMENT · 2024

Wilma Agnes Cullen v Dr Ruth Henniker-Major

[2024] EWHC 2809 (KB)·High Court (King's Bench Division)·7 November 2024

A GP saw Ms Cullen three times over five weeks with a persistent cough, sore throat and tiredness but did not make an urgent cancer referral; her laryngeal cancer was diagnosed at stage III about three months later. Liability was admitted, and the trial dealt with disputed care costs and the defendant's allegation that she had been fundamentally dishonest, which the judge rejected.

Outcome

Claimant succeeded

Sum stated in judgment

Not stated

Claim type

Cancer Misdiagnosis & Delayed Diagnosis

Decided

Damages assessed at trial

ClaimGavel Assistant

● Online · Cancer Misdiagnosis & Delayed Diagnosis · free & confidential

FREE

Free · confidential · not legal adviceEngland

§ WHAT HAPPENED

The facts, in brief.

Defendant: Dr Ruth Henniker-Major (general practitioner)

Injury: Stage III supraglottic laryngeal cancer diagnosed late, requiring chemoradiotherapy, total laryngectomy and bilateral neck dissections with severe chemotherapy complications; permanent stoma and voice valve

Specialty: General practice / head and neck oncology · England

§ WHAT THE COURT SAID

In the judgment’s own words.

“I assess the multiplicand for the future care claim at £96,680. The multiplier is agreed at 13.3. This produces an award of £1,285,844.”
[2024] EWHC 2809 (KB) at [303] · read the full judgment

The money

No single grand total is stated. Agreed heads at [4] include general damages of £100,000. The judge awarded future care of £1,285,844 (multiplicand £96,680 x agreed multiplier 13.3, [303]), future travel £49,500 ([305]), future psychological therapy £6,000 ([307]) and future equipment £30,687.58 ([309]). Lump sum, no PPO. Allegations of fundamental dishonesty were rejected ([277]).

§ WHY IT MATTERS

What this case shows.

A delayed cancer referral claim turns on what extra treatment the delay caused; here the admitted delay meant chemotherapy, a total laryngectomy and neck dissections that earlier diagnosis would have avoided. Social media posts relied on to allege dishonesty were found not to contradict her evidence.

About cancer misdiagnosis & delayed diagnosis claims →

§ MORE CANCER MISDIAGNOSIS & DELAYED DIAGNOSIS JUDGMENTS

Claimant succeeded

Cripps v Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

[2024] EWHC 615 (KB)·2024·Damages assessed at trial

The trust admitted that a misreported smear delayed the diagnosis of cervical cancer, and the claimant, who lost her fertility through treatment, asked for a further interim payment to fund surrogacy abroad. The judge refused because the evidence was not yet complete enough to be confident a trial judge would allow that cost.

Even with liability admitted, an interim payment will only be ordered for sums the court is confident will be recovered at trial. Whether overseas surrogacy costs are recoverable depends on a reasonableness test decided on full evidence.

Claimant succeeded

Shaw v Maguire

[2023] EWHC 2155 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial

A skin sample taken in 2007 was reported as benign but in fact showed melanoma, which was only picked up in 2009 and caused the patient's death in 2014. His widow issued proceedings over five years late after her first solicitors let the case drift, and the court allowed the claim to proceed.

The clock can start later than the mistake itself, because it only runs once you know the injury is serious. Delay caused by former solicitors rather than by the claimant is far less likely to defeat a late claim, especially where the original slides and reports survive.

Claim failed

Dalton v Southend University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

[2019] EWHC 832 (QB)·2019·Liability decided at trial

A 38-year-old woman with a hard breast lump had a mammogram and ultrasound that looked benign and was discharged without a biopsy; cancer was found in 2013. Yip J accepted that a responsible body of breast surgeons would not have biopsied on those findings.

Triple assessment does not always require a biopsy where imaging is reassuring. A later cancer diagnosis does not by itself prove the earlier clinic decision was negligent.

All cancer misdiagnosis & delayed diagnosis 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.