Mordel v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2591 (QB) (08 October 2019)

Mordel v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2591 (QB) (08 October 2019)

The defendant breached its duty of care by failing to take reasonable steps to ensure the claimant's decision to decline Down's syndrome screening was informed. The sonographer's practice of asking a closed question and not exploring the claimant's understanding or reasons was insufficient to obtain informed consent. The midwife also failed to follow up appropriately at the 16-week appointment. On the balance of probabilities, the claimant would have undergone further testing and terminated the pregnancy had she been properly informed and screening offered.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2591
Parties
Claimant: Edyta Ewelina Mordel; Defendant: Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Clinical Negligence Claim / Trial on Liability Only
Outcome
Claim allowed on liability; judgment for the claimant.
Legal Topics
Informed Consent, Clinical Negligence, Wrongful Birth, Standard of Care, Antenatal Screening
Medical Negligence Tort Law Informed Consent Clinical Negligence Wrongful Birth Standard of Care Antenatal Screening

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edyta Ewelina Mordel

Claimant

Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Clinical Negligence Claim / Trial on Liability Only

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant failed to offer and/or properly obtain informed consent for Down's syndrome screening at the 12-week scan.
  2. 2 Whether the midwife failed to follow up and offer appropriate screening at the 16-week appointment.
  3. 3 Whether the claimant would have undergone further testing and terminated the pregnancy if Down's syndrome had been diagnosed.

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant breached its duty of care by failing to take reasonable steps to ensure the claimant's decision to decline Down's syndrome screening was informed. The sonographer's practice of asking a closed question and not exploring the claimant's understanding or reasons was insufficient to obtain informed consent. The midwife also failed to follow up appropriately at the 16-week appointment. On the balance of probabilities, the claimant would have undergone further testing and terminated the pregnancy had she been properly informed and screening offered.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed on liability; judgment for the claimant.

Orders

  • Declaration of breach of duty by the defendant.
  • Defendant liable for damages to be assessed.