JAH v Burne & Ors

JAH v Burne & Ors

The claim against the First, Second, and Fourth Defendants fails because the evidence established that pedal pulses were present, there was no true history of intermittent claudication or ischaemic rest pain, and thus no indication for urgent vascular referral. Against the Third Defendant, Dr Jackson, causation is established for the loss of the arm, as an urgent referral and timely anti-coagulation would probably have avoided the upper limb amputation.

Parties
Claimant: JAH (by her litigation friend DXT); First Defendant: Dr Matthew Burne; Second Defendant: Dr Hilary Devonshire; Third Defendant: Dr Louise Jackson; Fourth Defendant: Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Clinical Negligence / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed against First, Second, and Fourth Defendants; judgment for Claimant against Third Defendant.
Legal Topics
Clinical Negligence, Causation, Breach of Duty, Damages, Medical Evidence
Tort Medical Negligence Clinical Negligence Causation Breach of Duty Damages Medical Evidence

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JAH (by her litigation friend DXT)

Claimant

Dr Matthew Burne

First Defendant

Dr Hilary Devonshire

Second Defendant

Dr Louise Jackson

Third Defendant

Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Clinical Negligence / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants breached their duty of care to the Claimant in the management of her vascular symptoms in May 2012
  2. 2 Whether any breach of duty caused the amputations of the Claimant's limbs
  3. 3 Whether earlier referral and treatment would have avoided the amputations

Ratio Decidendi

The claim against the First, Second, and Fourth Defendants fails because the evidence established that pedal pulses were present, there was no true history of intermittent claudication or ischaemic rest pain, and thus no indication for urgent vascular referral. Against the Third Defendant, Dr Jackson, causation is established for the loss of the arm, as an urgent referral and timely anti-coagulation would probably have avoided the upper limb amputation.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed against First, Second, and Fourth Defendants; judgment for Claimant against Third Defendant.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Claimant against the Third Defendant in the sum of £150,000.
  • Claim dismissed against the First, Second, and Fourth Defendants.