Watts v North Bristol NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 2048 (QB) (29 July 2022)

Watts v North Bristol NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 2048 (QB) (29 July 2022)

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he would have chosen microdiscectomy if properly advised, and thus causation was not established; the trial judge's findings were not plainly wrong and should not be overturned.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2048
Parties
Appellant: Mr Daniel Watts; Respondent: North Bristol NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Clinical Negligence Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment to High Court (queen's Bench Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Informed Consent, Clinical Negligence, Causation, Damages, Standard of Care
Medical Law Tort Law Informed Consent Clinical Negligence Causation Damages Standard of Care

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Mr Daniel Watts

Appellant

North Bristol NHS Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Clinical Negligence Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment to High Court (queen's Bench Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the surgeon failed to obtain informed consent by not advising on alternative procedures
  2. 2 Whether the claimant would have chosen microdiscectomy if properly advised
  3. 3 Whether microdiscectomy would have resulted in a better outcome for the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he would have chosen microdiscectomy if properly advised, and thus causation was not established; the trial judge's findings were not plainly wrong and should not be overturned.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed