KA & Anor v East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust

KA & Anor v East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in admitting the un-redacted expert evidence and correctly applied the Bolam test to the facts. The judge was entitled to find that the emergency medical technicians were negligent, as their actions did not accord with the practice accepted by a responsible body of medical opinion, despite their good intentions. There was no important point of principle or compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: KA; Claimant/respondent: Another; Defendant/applicant: East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal) From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Standard of Care, Case Management, Second Appeals, Bolam Test
Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Admissibility of Expert Evidence Standard of Care Case Management Second Appeals Bolam Test

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KA

Claimant/respondent

Another

Claimant/respondent

East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal) From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting un-redacted expert evidence of Dr Longstaff
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to properly consider the 'horns of a dilemma' faced by emergency medical technicians under the Bolam test
  3. 3 Whether permission for a second appeal should be granted under CPR 52.13(2)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in admitting the un-redacted expert evidence and correctly applied the Bolam test to the facts. The judge was entitled to find that the emergency medical technicians were negligent, as their actions did not accord with the practice accepted by a responsible body of medical opinion, despite their good intentions. There was no important point of principle or compelling reason to grant permission for a second appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Applications dismissed
  • No permission to appeal granted