Dowson v Lane

Dowson v Lane

The Defendant was not in breach of duty because her actions in not referring the Claimant to the Foot Clinic on the basis of swelling alone, without redness, warmth, or deformity, were in accordance with a responsible body of GP practice in 2014, and such practice was not illogical or indefensible under the Bolam/Bolitho standard. The claim therefore fails.

Parties
Claimant: Joanne Dowson; Defendant: Dr Ashleigh Lane
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Clinical Negligence / Judgment After Trial on Breach of Duty and Causation
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Clinical Negligence, Standard of Care, Causation, Medical Guidelines, Professional Practice
Medical Law Tort Law Clinical Negligence Standard of Care Causation Medical Guidelines Professional Practice

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joanne Dowson

Claimant

Dr Ashleigh Lane

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Clinical Negligence / Judgment After Trial on Breach of Duty and Causation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant GP breached the duty of care owed to the Claimant by failing to refer her to the Medical Foot Clinic in March or April 2014 for suspected Charcot foot
  2. 2 Whether any such breach caused or materially contributed to the Claimant's foot deformity

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendant was not in breach of duty because her actions in not referring the Claimant to the Foot Clinic on the basis of swelling alone, without redness, warmth, or deformity, were in accordance with a responsible body of GP practice in 2014, and such practice was not illogical or indefensible under the Bolam/Bolitho standard. The claim therefore fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • The claim against the Defendant is dismissed.