Where harm builds cumulatively, a claimant may succeed by showing the delay made a material contribution, rather than proving the whole injury was avoidable.
Claim failed
[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.
Claimant succeeded
[2026] EWHC 1574 (KB)·2026·Liability and damages decided at trial
A 37-year-old alcohol-dependent man admitted for a facial abscess was not given the prophylactic vitamin B1 (Pabrinex) that guidelines required during withdrawal, which the Trust admitted was a breach. The judge found this caused Wernicke's encephalopathy and a lasting functional disorder, and set the main heads of damages including a 24-hour care regime.
Breach was admitted, so the case turned on proving the brain injury was caused by the omission rather than by pre-existing conditions. It illustrates how catastrophic-injury awards are built from a care multiplicand, case management and accommodation rather than a single headline figure.
Claim failed
[2026] EWHC 560 (KB)·2026·Liability decided at trial
A mother's waters broke at 27 weeks and a swab grew Group B Streptococcus resistant to erythromycin; the child argued penicillin should have been given before birth to prevent infection-related brain injury. The court held that following national rather than local guidance was not negligent and that antibiotics would not, on the evidence, have prevented the injury.
Following national guidance is a strong defence even where a hospital's own local guidance says otherwise. In premature-birth cases causation often fails because the injury would have happened regardless.
Claimant succeeded
[2025] EWHC 1261 (KB)·2025·Liability decided at trial
Ms Hodgson saw a locum GP who suspected pelvic inflammatory disease but did not examine her or arrange urgent follow-up, and a second GP reviewing her blood results by telephone did not refer her for examination. The delay in treatment led to an abscess, removal of a fallopian tube and chronic pelvic pain.
When a GP suspects a serious infection, the court expects an examination or urgent referral to rule it out, and a telephone review of test results does not replace that. Both GPs were held liable, with damages to be decided separately.
Claimant succeeded
[2024] EWHC 3156 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
A young woman with cerebral palsy had a PEG feeding tube inserted and was found unresponsive two days later with peritonitis and sepsis. The judge rejected the doctor's account of how the tube was fixed, found it was placed under too much tension, and entered judgment for the claimant.
Where a clinician's recollection is unreliable and contradicted by the physical evidence, the court can find a procedure was done negligently. Causation may still be limited where a pre-existing condition would have deteriorated anyway.
Claim failed
[2024] EWHC 2338 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
Admitted with perforated diverticulitis, the claimant had a laparoscopic washout and deteriorated about 36 hours later, needing an emergency Hartmann's procedure with a stoma and intensive care. She alleged she had asked for a colorectal referral, was improperly moved to private care and was not properly consented, but the judge found none of this proved and dismissed the claims against both the surgeon and the trust.
Consent disputes turn on evidence of what was actually discussed; where the records and the surgeon's account show the alternative procedure was explained, a claim based on inadequate consent is likely to fail.
Claimant succeeded£1.2M
[2024] EWHC 1360 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
Mr Healey died nine days after bowel cancer surgery at a private hospital when a leak at the surgical join was not recognised in time. The hospital settled the widow's claim for £1.2 million and the court ordered the surgeon to bear 75% of it, finding his failure to diagnose the leak the principal cause of death.
Post-operative deterioration after bowel surgery must prompt urgent consideration of a leak. Both the private hospital and the individual surgeon can be liable, with the court apportioning responsibility between them.
Mixed outcome
[2024] EWHC 1304 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
A woman went to A&E with extreme lower-leg pain and was sent home by a nurse practitioner instead of being seen by a senior doctor or referred to surgeons; she developed a necrotising soft tissue infection and lost her leg. The Trust admitted negligence but tried to rely on the nurse's evidence disputing how much pain she reported; the Master ruled that evidence inadmissible because the defence had never properly pleaded that dispute.
An NHS trust cannot admit negligence and then quietly contest the facts at trial without pleading them. Severe, out-of-proportion pain in a limb is a recognised warning sign of necrotising infection that calls for senior review.
Claimant succeeded
[2024] EWHC 390 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
Mr Gahir went to his GP with fever, severe headache, nausea and confusion; the GP diagnosed migraine, and he was not admitted to hospital until 55 hours later, when herpes simplex encephalitis was treated with acyclovir. The judge found the combination of fever, headache and confusion required urgent hospital referral and that earlier treatment would have left him far less disabled.
Fever, headache and confusion together are a recognised red flag for brain infection, and a GP who attributes them to migraine without arranging urgent admission may be found negligent. The judge accepted the family's account of the patient's confusion during the consultation.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 1199 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A baby born at James Cook University Hospital was discharged two days after birth and died of GBS meningitis and sepsis. The judge found only one limited breach (a missing piece of discharge advice) and that it did not cause the death because the mother would not have returned to hospital in time.
Even where a hospital gets something wrong, the claim fails unless the mistake is shown to have changed what happened. Record-keeping failings alone did not establish causation here.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 1911 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A woman attended a GP drop-in clinic with groin pain after an injection had missed the vein; the GP diagnosed a haematoma and sent her away with painkillers, and days later she was admitted with necrotising fasciitis and her right leg was amputated at the hip. The judge found the GP's examination and diagnosis were ones a reasonable body of GPs would support, so the claim failed despite the defendant accepting that referral would have saved her leg.
Even where a devastating outcome and causation are accepted, a claim fails unless the clinician's decision fell outside what a responsible body of practitioners would have done. A properly documented history and examination that reasonably excluded infection was a complete defence.
Claimant succeeded
[2023] EWHC 191 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
Dr Somoye died of abdominal sepsis and multi-organ failure a week after a myomectomy; the trust's own root cause analysis found failures to act on signs of infection and to follow the sepsis pathway, and it admitted liability before proceedings. The court refused to let the trust withdraw that admission and entered judgment for her husband, with damages to be assessed.
A pre-action admission of liability is binding unless the court permits withdrawal, and later-obtained expert evidence will not usually justify that. Failing to follow a hospital sepsis pathway is a recognised basis for a claim.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 156 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A three-year-old was diagnosed with tonsillitis by a GP registrar, deteriorated over the next two days and was then referred to hospital, where meningococcal meningitis was diagnosed. The court found no causative breach of duty and dismissed the claim.
Meningitis claims against GPs often fail because early symptoms genuinely resemble common childhood infections; the claimant must show both that the GP fell below a reasonable standard and that earlier referral would have changed the outcome.
Claim failed
[2022] EWHC 2735 (KB)·2022·Liability decided at trial
A man with end-stage kidney failure was given a single 400mg gentamicin dose for a chest infection and suffered permanent balance and hearing damage. His sister's claim failed because the judge accepted that a high dose was a reasonable choice for a worsening infection with sepsis risk, despite his renal impairment.
A drug dose that causes known side-effects is not automatically negligent if it was a reasonable clinical judgement in the circumstances. Departing from a hospital guideline is not itself proof of negligence.
Claimant succeeded
[2021] EWHC 169 (QB)·2021·Liability decided at trial
Mrs Davies was admitted to Wexham Park Hospital with pneumococcal meningitis; the trust admitted intravenous antibiotics should have started by 10.40 but were not given until 13.20, and she died two days later. After a causation trial the judge found she would probably have survived with timely antibiotics.
In sepsis and meningitis claims a delay of even a few hours in giving IV antibiotics can be negligent, and the key dispute is often whether the delay changed the outcome. Here the family succeeded, with damages already agreed.
Claim failed
[2020] EWHC 3445 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial
A two-and-a-half-year-old girl seen at a Badger out-of-hours centre was diagnosed with a sore throat and sent home; two days later scans showed hydrocephalus and brain abnormalities needing emergency neurosurgery, leaving her profoundly disabled. This judgment decided only whether the NHS commissioning body was legally responsible for the nurse practitioner's alleged negligence, and held it was not.
When an NHS body contracts an outside provider to run out-of-hours services, the NHS body does not automatically carry a non-delegable duty for that provider's clinicians. Claims must be brought against the clinician and the out-of-hours provider themselves.
Claimant succeeded
[2020] EWHC 1610 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial
A GP suspected meningitis in a floppy, feverish toddler, gave penicillin and sent her by ambulance, but hospital doctors diagnosed viral tonsillitis and sent her home. Johnson J found the paediatricians should have recognised that the antibiotic could be masking sepsis and given IV antibiotics, which would have prevented her brain injury.
Hospital doctors must take a referring GP's findings seriously, especially where treatment already given may hide the true picture. A child sent in with suspected meningitis should not be discharged on reassurance alone.
Claim failed
[2020] EWHC 158 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial
After an appendectomy a woman developed an abdominal mass that scans labelled a harmless omental infarction; it was actually a rare bacterial infection that later formed an abscess needing surgery. The judge accepted an early biopsy would have avoided this but held the doctors were not negligent in not doing one.
Hindsight showing that a test would have helped is not the same as proving it was negligent not to do it. Unusual infections that mimic benign findings on scans are a recognised trap for both clinicians and claimants.
Claim failed
[2019] EWHC 2488 (QB)·2019·Liability decided at trial
The claimant was discharged two days after a sleeve gastrectomy despite nausea, vomiting and pain, and weeks later developed severe sepsis from a leak. The judge found the discharge and follow-up were not negligent and that earlier action would not have changed the outcome.
Early discharge after bariatric surgery is not negligent if symptoms at the time were within the expected range. Claims fail if the leak would have developed and been treated the same way regardless.
Claimant succeeded
[2018] EWHC 1917 (QB)·2018·Liability and damages decided at trial
A 40-year-old had gastric bypass surgery and developed a leak that was not diagnosed until a day after clear warning signs. Yip J found the trust liable for several failings and assessed general damages at £100,000 plus care and therapy costs.
After weight-loss surgery, signs of a leak need to be acted on promptly; delayed diagnosis can turn a treatable complication into life-changing injury. General damages reflect the whole picture of pain, disability and psychological harm.
Claim failed
[2018] EWHC 343 (QB)·2018·Liability decided at trial
Five days after surgery to reverse his ileostomy the 60-year-old claimant developed sepsis and his whole colon had to be removed because its blood supply had failed. He alleged the surgeon had damaged the marginal artery, but Yip J was not satisfied that the injury was caused by negligence rather than a naturally occurring clot.
A serious complication after bowel surgery is not itself proof of negligence; the claimant must show on the balance of probabilities that a surgical error, rather than an unavoidable event, caused the harm.
Claimant succeeded
[2017] EWHC 1795 (QB)·2017·Liability decided at trial
A 53-year-old diabetic attended A&E with fever, rectal pain and urinary difficulty; a possible abscess was noted but he left before blood results and was not properly investigated. He returned two days later in septic shock and lost his lower leg, toes and fingers; the court found that proper care at the first attendance would have avoided the amputations.
Diabetic patients with fever and localised pain need prompt investigation for a source of infection. A&E is responsible for ensuring a possibly septic patient is not allowed to leave without a plan.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 1729 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
After a radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer the patient developed an abscess and a narrowed ureter, and later lost a kidney; she alleged the bowel was perforated at surgery and that urologists should have been involved in a second operation. The judge preferred the hospital's explanation for the infection and found no negligence in either operation.
Ureteric and kidney damage after pelvic surgery is not automatically negligent; the court will examine the most likely mechanism. Expert evidence on the cause of infection is often decisive.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 1214 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
A patient with a prosthetic aortic valve had abnormal inflammatory markers on blood tests in November 2010; his GP arranged a routine appointment rather than urgent hospital admission and he suffered a stroke from endocarditis in January 2011. The judge found the results did not ground a reasonable suspicion of endocarditis and the GP's response was one a reasonable body of GPs would take.
Abnormal blood results must be acted on, but the level of urgency required depends on what a reasonable GP would have suspected at the time; a routine review can be acceptable where the overall picture did not point to a serious diagnosis.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 1101 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
A mother alleged that a registrar negligently failed to spot on an ultrasound that a substantial piece of placenta had been left behind after birth, leading to infection and an emergency operation two weeks later. The parties agreed the claim depended on proving a substantial (about 7 cm) piece was retained, and the judge was not persuaded of that on the evidence.
Retained placenta claims often turn on what the scan would actually have shown; if the retained tissue was small, a missed scan finding may not be negligent. Agreed thresholds for success can decide a case.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 251 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
After surgery for a broken femur at St Richard's Hospital, Chichester, the patient was discharged in April 2008 without arrangements to repeat his inflammatory-marker blood tests, and a deep infection was diagnosed later. The court found this discharge and a four-day debridement delay were breaches of duty, but there was no evidence they made his condition materially worse, so the claim was dismissed.
Discharging a patient without arranging follow-up blood tests can be a breach of duty, but compensation depends on showing the delay actually worsened the outcome.
Claimant succeeded
[2016] UKPC 4·2016·Appeal decision
A patient with appendicitis waited hours for a CT scan and surgery; by the time his appendix was removed it had ruptured and sepsis had damaged his heart and lungs. The Privy Council held the hospital was liable because its delay materially contributed to the injury, even though some harm would have occurred anyway.
Where negligent delay makes an existing condition worse in a cumulative way, a claimant need not prove the whole injury would have been avoided, only that the delay made a more-than-negligible contribution. This is often relied on in sepsis and delayed-treatment claims.
Claim failed
[2015] EWHC 440 (QB)·2015·Liability decided at trial
A man with a bone disorder was admitted with leg pain, given antibiotics without blood cultures being taken first, and later discharged; weeks later he returned with a spinal infection and became paraplegic. The court found basic failures (no cultures, no monitoring of inflammatory markers) but was not satisfied they caused the paralysis.
Proving a hospital made mistakes is not enough; the claimant must show those mistakes probably caused the injury. Infection cases often turn on whether earlier detection would have changed treatment.
Claimant succeeded
[2014] EWHC 3016 (QB)·2014·Damages assessed at trial
A woman who was already paralysed from a spinal condition developed severe pressure sores during a long hospital stay, and the Trust admitted that this was negligent. The judge decided how much the sores and their consequences had added to her care needs and assessed her damages.
Where a patient already has serious health needs, the hospital is only responsible for the extra needs its negligence causes. The Court of Appeal later sent the damages back to be worked out again on that narrower basis.
Claim failed
[2012] EWHC 2335 (QB)·2012·Liability decided at trial
Mrs Clements alleged that during bowel cancer surgery the surgeons twisted the bowel's mesentery before rejoining it and failed to check, causing obstruction, a second operation and catastrophic complications. The judge found the join was properly formed and the later obstruction was caused by adhesions, so there was no negligence.
Serious complications after surgery do not by themselves prove the operation was done negligently. The court will weigh the operating surgeons' evidence against what was found at the second operation.
Claimant succeeded
[2008] EWHC 1011 (QB)·2008·Liability decided at trial
A woman with a spinal abscess was sent home from A&E and left with lasting spinal cord damage. Her first claim was issued in time but thrown out when her solicitors served it a day late, and this second, out-of-time claim was allowed to proceed.
If solicitors miss a court deadline, the law does not automatically leave the claimant with only a claim against them. The court can let a fresh, late claim run against the original defendants where a fair trial is still possible.