§ PUBLISHED JUDGMENT · 2025

HQA v Newcastle-upon-Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

[2025] EWHC 2121 (KB)·High Court (King's Bench Division)·8 August 2025

A 25-year-old with congenital heart disease suffered a severe brain injury when her aorta was cut during a high-risk repeat sternotomy and it took around 24 minutes to get her onto full bypass. The judge found the surgeon should have exposed the femoral vessels in advance (saving around 13 minutes) and that consent was deficient; she would still have gone ahead with the operation, but with that precaution taken.

Outcome

Claimant succeeded

Sum stated in judgment

Not stated

Claim type

Cardiac Negligence

Decided

Liability decided at trial

G
ClaimGavel Assistant
● Online · Cardiac 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: Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Freeman Hospital) · this trust’s claims data

Injury: Catastrophic haemorrhage when the aorta was cut during a third re-do sternotomy, with roughly 24 minutes before full cardiopulmonary bypass, causing severe hypoxic brain injury; the claimant now lacks litigation capacity

Specialty: Congenital cardiac surgery · England

§ WHAT THE COURT SAID

In the judgment’s own words.

“There was also a breach of duty in failing to advise the Claimant that prior to commencing the sternotomy the femoral vessels could be exposed and prepared in order to attempt to mitigate the severity of the injuries which might result from the foreseeable and known risk of aortic injury occurring.”

The money

Trial of preliminary issues on breach of duty only; no damages figure. The judge found about 13 minutes would have been saved but for the breach; causation of the brain injury and quantum were left for later determination.

§ WHY IT MATTERS

What this case shows.

Surgeons planning a known high-risk operation must take reasonable precautions beforehand and tell the patient about them; a court can find negligence in planning and consent even where the intra-operative error itself was not negligent.

About cardiac negligence claims →

§ MORE CARDIAC NEGLIGENCE JUDGMENTS

Claimant succeeded

Dakin v South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

[2026] EWCC 26·2026·Liability decided at trial

A theatre nurse with worsening palpitations saw a hospital physician who admittedly failed to arrange 24-hour ECG monitoring. The judge found monitoring would have caught her atrial fibrillation in time for anticoagulants to prevent the stroke she suffered.

Palpitations that keep coming back need proper heart-rhythm monitoring. Where a missed test would have led to blood-thinning treatment, a later stroke can be laid at the hospital's door.

Claim failed

Negus & Anor v Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

[2021] EWHC 643 (QB)·2021·Liability decided at trial

The executors of Mrs Neill argued her surgeon should have enlarged the aortic root to fit a larger valve rather than implant a 19mm mechanical valve, and failed to warn her about that option. Eady J found the valve choice was not negligent and, although the possibility of root enlargement should have been mentioned, it would have made no difference to her decision.

A consent failure only leads to compensation if the patient would have made a different choice with proper information. Surgical decisions supported by a responsible body of opinion are not negligent just because another surgeon would have done differently.

Claimant succeeded

Crammond v Medway NHS Foundation Trust

[2015] EWHC 3540 (QB)·2015·Liability decided at trial

Mr Crammond went to A&E with four days of central chest pain radiating to both arms, but an A&E doctor streamed him to the same-day treatment centre on the strength of an essentially normal ECG without taking a history, and a GP there diagnosed gastritis. The judge held that a competent A&E doctor would have taken a short history and ordered tests that would have revealed his heart disease, avoiding the severe heart problems he suffered four years later.

An A&E doctor cannot rely on a normal ECG to send a chest-pain patient away without taking a proper history. Redirecting a patient to a lower-acuity service without assessing their risk factors can itself be negligent.

All cardiac 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.