De Freitas v O'Brien [1995] EWCA Civ 28 (02 February 1995)

De Freitas v O'Brien [1995] EWCA Civ 28 (02 February 1995)

The plaintiff failed to prove that the decision to operate was one that no responsible body of surgeons practising in the defendant's specialism would have taken; the evidence of the defendant's expert witnesses constituted a responsible body of medical opinion supporting the decision.

Citation
[1995] EWCA Civ 28
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Mrs Patricia De Freitas; First Defendant/respondent: John O'Brien; Second Defendant: Raynier Campbell-Connolly
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision on Liability
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Standard of Care, Bolam Test, Clinical Judgment, Expert Evidence, Burden of Proof
Medical Negligence Tort Law Standard of Care Bolam Test Clinical Judgment Expert Evidence Burden of Proof

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Patricia De Freitas

Plaintiff/appellant

John O'Brien

First Defendant/respondent

Raynier Campbell-Connolly

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defendant was negligent in deciding to operate on 26 August 1988 without sufficient clinical or radiological evidence
  2. 2 Whether a responsible body of medical opinion would have supported the decision to operate
  3. 3 Whether the small number of spinal surgeons constitutes a responsible body for the purposes of the Bolam test

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove that the decision to operate was one that no responsible body of surgeons practising in the defendant's specialism would have taken; the evidence of the defendant's expert witnesses constituted a responsible body of medical opinion supporting the decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order for payment of the Respondent's costs by the Legal Aid Board, subject to the order lying in the office for 10 weeks for the Area Director to show cause otherwise.