Martine Robinson v Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust

Martine Robinson v Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust

The court held that Mr Mercier was qualified to give expert evidence on the issues of breach of duty and causation in this dental extraction case, that his conduct did not amount to a flagrant or reckless disregard of his duty to the court, and that this was not an exceptional case justifying a Third Party Costs Order against him. The appeal was allowed and the costs order set aside.

Parties
Claimant: Miss Martine Robinson; Defendant/respondent: Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust; Third Party/appellant: Mr Christopher Mercier
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Third Party Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Third Party Costs Orders, Expert Witness Qualification, Clinical Negligence, Consent in Medical Treatment
Civil Procedure Medical Negligence Third Party Costs Orders Expert Witness Qualification Clinical Negligence Consent in Medical Treatment

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Martine Robinson

Claimant

Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Trust

Defendant/respondent

Mr Christopher Mercier

Third Party/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Third Party Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Third Party Costs Order (TPCO) should be made against an expert witness for allegedly acting outside their expertise
  2. 2 Whether a general dental practitioner is qualified to give expert evidence on the standard of care provided by a maxillofacial surgeon in a dental extraction case
  3. 3 Whether the expert's conduct amounted to a flagrant or reckless disregard of duty to the court

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Mr Mercier was qualified to give expert evidence on the issues of breach of duty and causation in this dental extraction case, that his conduct did not amount to a flagrant or reckless disregard of his duty to the court, and that this was not an exceptional case justifying a Third Party Costs Order against him. The appeal was allowed and the costs order set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Third Party Costs Order against Mr Mercier set aside
  • No costs order to be made against Mr Mercier