header-logo header-logo

01 March 2024 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8061 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Damages , National Health Service
printer mail-detail

Medical negligence: secondary victims?

161581
Nicholas Dobson considers the debate on the extension of the duty of care to patients’ relatives
  • Doctors have no duty of care to close relatives of their patients to protect the relatives from risk of illness by witnessing the death or serious illness of those patients from a medical condition which the doctor had negligently failed to diagnose and treat.
  • Covers Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust.

To witness the death or serious injury of someone close and loved must be a deeply harrowing experience. As the late Queen Elizabeth observed to families bereaved by the September 11 terror attacks in 2001: ‘Grief is the price we pay for love.’ But if medically negligent treatment given by doctors results in psychological or other injury to the patient’s relatives, do doctors have a duty of care to those relatives?

This was the thorny question faced by a panel of seven justices in the Supreme Court in May 2023 and on 11 January 2024, when judgment was given in Paul and another v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust; Polmear and another

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll