Every one a published decision of the courts of England and Wales, linked to its source.
Claimant succeeded£119,048
[2012] EWHC 1335 (QB)·2012·Liability and damages decided at trial
Paramedics attended Mrs Taaffe for severe chest pain, found it had subsided, took two ECGs (one flagged by the machine as abnormal) and left her to see her GP the next day; she died of a heart attack five days later. The judge found the paramedics failed to take a proper history or assess her risk factors and should have advised hospital attendance, where her condition would have been found and treated.
Ambulance crews owe a duty to take a proper history and weigh risk factors, not just current symptoms, before deciding not to convey a chest-pain patient. Where hospital assessment would have prevented the death, the ambulance trust is liable.
Claim failed
[2015] EWHC 1311 (QB)·2015·Liability decided at trial
Mr Choudhury called 999 twice in the early hours with dizziness, sweating and head pain; paramedics left him at home both times, he collapsed with a stroke and lay unattended for over eight hours, and at hospital his CT scan was wrongly read as normal and aspirin was delayed. Both defendants admitted these breaches, but the judge found the claimant could not prove that earlier treatment would have prevented the deterioration that left him locked-in.
Admitted failings by an ambulance crew and hospital are not enough on their own; the claimant must prove that proper treatment would probably have avoided the injury. With rare, severe strokes the medical evidence on what treatment would have achieved can defeat the claim.
Claimant succeeded
[2015] EWHC 18 (QB)·2015·Liability and damages decided at trial
An ambulance crew attending a man in a life-threatening asthma attack gave salbutamol and oxygen but recorded no observations, did not give the further drugs the guidelines call for, and he collapsed and died as they prepared to move him. The judge found these failures negligent and that with proper treatment he would probably have survived, so the ambulance trust was liable to his family.
Ambulance staff must follow the national guidelines for life-threatening asthma, including objective observations and escalating drug treatment. Causation can be proved where proper treatment would have given a better-than-even chance of survival.
Claimant succeeded£522,379
[2014] EWHC 286 (QB)·2014·Liability and damages decided at trial
Ms Leigh dislocated her kneecap boarding a bus and was trapped in severe pain for about 50 minutes before an ambulance arrived; the trust admitted 17 minutes of that delay was negligent. The judge found the negligent delay made a material contribution to her PTSD, that her dissociative seizures were part of the PTSD, and assessed damages at £522,379 plus interest.
Even a short negligent ambulance delay can found a substantial claim where it materially contributes to a serious psychiatric injury. Damages can include lost earnings and pension where the injury ends the claimant's career.
Claimant succeeded£40,000
[2020] EWHC 2914 (QB)·2020·Liability and damages decided at trial
Ms Leach, alone at home with a brain haemorrhage, waited nearly two hours for an ambulance, of which the trust admitted 31 minutes was negligent delay; she went on to develop PTSD. The judge held that the negligent delay made a material contribution to her PTSD, that PTSD cannot be apportioned, and awarded the agreed £40,000.
Where a negligent ambulance delay materially contributes to a psychiatric injury like PTSD, the trust is liable for the whole injury and cannot reduce damages by arguing only part of the wait was its fault.
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.