Singleton v Health Service Executive [2018] IEHC 270 (10 May 2018)

Singleton v Health Service Executive [2018] IEHC 270 (10 May 2018)

The court found that the plaintiff was alert and capable of giving informed consent at the time the blood sample was taken, as evidenced by her ability to converse, understand, and specifically instruct that results not be sent to her GP. The court accepted the evidence of Dr. Nally and Dr. Loughrey that the plaintiff had recovered sufficiently from anaesthesia. The court found no breach of duty by the defendant in obtaining consent or in communication. The court further found that the plaintiff did not suffer a recognisable psychiatric disorder as a result of the incident, and that her symptoms were attributable to pre-existing conditions and personality traits. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2018] IEHC 270
Parties
Plaintiff: Kathryn Singleton; Defendant: Health Service Executive
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
10 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries/medical Negligence / High Court Judgment After Plenary Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Informed Consent, Capacity to Consent, Psychiatric Injury, Duty of Care, Eggshell Skull Rule
Medical Negligence Tort Law Informed Consent Capacity to Consent Psychiatric Injury Duty of Care Eggshell Skull Rule

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kathryn Singleton

Plaintiff

Health Service Executive

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries/medical Negligence / High Court Judgment After Plenary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff gave valid and informed consent to a blood test following a medical procedure while under the effects of anaesthesia
  2. 2 Whether the defendant breached the duty of care owed to the plaintiff in obtaining consent and in communication
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff suffered actionable injury (physical or psychiatric) as a result of the alleged breach

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff was alert and capable of giving informed consent at the time the blood sample was taken, as evidenced by her ability to converse, understand, and specifically instruct that results not be sent to her GP. The court accepted the evidence of Dr. Nally and Dr. Loughrey that the plaintiff had recovered sufficiently from anaesthesia. The court found no breach of duty by the defendant in obtaining consent or in communication. The court further found that the plaintiff did not suffer a recognisable psychiatric disorder as a result of the incident, and that her symptoms were attributable to pre-existing conditions and personality traits. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed
  • No order as to costs specified in the judgment