Thomas v Curley

Thomas v Curley

The judge was entitled to infer negligence based on evidence that the injury occurred during an uncomplicated procedure, distant from the site of operation, with no explanation forthcoming from the defendant or his expert; res ipsa loquitur was not applied, and the burden of proof was not reversed.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Paula Thomas; Defendant/appellant: Paul Curley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Duty, Res Ipsa Loquitur, Causation, Damages, Disclosure
Medical Negligence Tort Law Breach of Duty Res Ipsa Loquitur Causation Damages Disclosure

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paula Thomas

Claimant/respondent

Paul Curley

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was negligent in causing an iatrogenic injury to the respondent’s common bile duct during laparoscopic surgery
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was negligent in failing to require fluid balance and renal monitoring between 19th and 21st October 2005
  3. 3 Whether causation and quantum were properly determined

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to infer negligence based on evidence that the injury occurred during an uncomplicated procedure, distant from the site of operation, with no explanation forthcoming from the defendant or his expert; res ipsa loquitur was not applied, and the burden of proof was not reversed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the claimant in the sum of £92,391.00
  • Permission to adduce further evidence on appeal refused