Every case below is a published judgment of the courts of England and Wales, linked to its source. Summaries are ours; amounts appear only where the judgment states them. We include claims that failed, because they show what has to be proved.
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£550,000
[2026] EWHC 1284 (KB)·2026·Liability decided at trial
A patient developed life-threatening pancreatitis after a gallstone-removal ERCP. The judge found the consultant never prescribed or instructed the standard preventive diclofenac suppository, so it was not given, and entered judgment for £550,000 against him.
Failing to give a recognised prophylactic drug before a procedure can be negligent even in private care. The prescribing doctor, not the hospital, carried the liability here.
Claim failed
[2025] EWHC 2597 (KB)·2025·Liability decided at trial
An orthopaedic surgeon had a second stroke and the on-call stroke consultant, assessing by telephone because the video link was broken, decided against clot-busting treatment. The judge found documentation was poor but that thrombolysis would probably not have changed the outcome, and rejected the defendants' allegation that the claimant had faked his test results.
Poor record-keeping and a remote consultation do not win a case on their own; the claimant must show the missed treatment would have made a real difference. A defence of dishonesty needs solid evidence and failed here.
Claimant succeeded
[2023] EWHC 2765 (KB)·2023·Damages assessed at trial
A man who fell from a scooter in May 2019 alleged the ambulance crew and the A&E department failed to recognise and immobilise a spinal injury, manage his blood pressure or protect him from pressure sores. On an interim payment application the Master was satisfied he would succeed on the hand-function and pressure-sore injuries and ordered £109,006.96.
Where the evidence of breach and causation is strong, a court can order a substantial interim payment before trial to fund immediate needs, even though the final award remains to be decided.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 1304 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
During surgery for a giant calcified thoracic disc the surgeon changed from the planned approach to opening the dura, and the patient was left partially paralysed. The judge found the change of approach and the surgical technique were supported by a responsible body of neurosurgical opinion and dismissed the claim.
Changing surgical plan mid-operation is not negligent where the alternative is a recognised, logical approach. Catastrophic outcomes from high-risk spinal surgery do not by themselves establish a breach of duty.
Claimant succeeded
[2023] EWHC 1290 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A woman with long-standing back pain saw a pain consultant in 2009 and 2010 who did not order an updated MRI or examine her neurologically; a thoracic disc prolapse went undiagnosed until she became paraplegic in 2017. The court held the consultant negligent and that timely surgery would have given a full neurological recovery, but found the A&E nurse practitioner in 2017 was not at fault.
Failing to re-image or examine a patient whose back pain has changed can amount to negligence years before the catastrophic outcome. Each clinician's conduct is judged separately.