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.
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.
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
[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.
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.
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
[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
[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.