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£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
[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
[2020] EWHC 2902 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial
A 79-year-old with macular degeneration was persuaded to have an intraocular lens implant in her better eye without proper informed consent, then developed raised eye pressure that the surgeon left untreated for five weeks. Stacey J found the surgeon negligent both in consenting and in delaying laser treatment, causing total blindness in that eye.
Private eye surgeons must obtain genuinely informed consent and act promptly on post-operative complications. A delay that materially contributes to permanent damage is enough for liability even if some harm had already occurred.
Claim failed
[2020] EWHC 359 (QB)·2020·Appeal decision
A 65-year-old inpatient who became confused at night fell out of bed and hurt her knees, and she argued that bed rails should have been fitted. The trial judge found that rails had not been recommended and would have been removed anyway, and the High Court refused to disturb those findings.
Bed rails are not automatically the safe option, because they can create their own risks for a confused and mobile patient. An appeal court will rarely overturn a trial judge's findings about what nursing staff decided or would have decided.
Claimant succeeded
[2019] EWHC 2591 (QB)·2019·Liability decided at trial
The mother had accepted Down's screening at booking, but the sonographer recorded it as declined at the scan and nobody checked that she really understood and meant to refuse. The judge found the trust in breach and accepted she would have had invasive testing and a termination had the screening been done.
A patient's apparent refusal of screening must be properly checked; a quick question and a note saying declined can be negligent. Failing to offer or confirm antenatal screening can found a wrongful birth claim.
Claim failed
[2017] EWCA Civ 1711·2017·Appeal decision
A man treated in the early 1980s sued in 2014, saying no one followed up his hormone condition until a new doctor restarted treatment in 2011. The Court of Appeal found he had known enough back in 1983 and that a 28-year delay had destroyed the records needed to defend the case.
Where very long delay means the records that would show what actually happened no longer exist, the court will usually hold the claimant to the deadline. Realising only years later that better treatment existed does not by itself restart the clock.