BELL AGAINST ALLIANCE MEDICAL Ltd AND JACKIE McCOLL AND FORTH VALLEY HEALTH BOARD [2015] ScotCS CSOH_34 (02 April 2015)

BELL AGAINST ALLIANCE MEDICAL Ltd AND JACKIE McCOLL AND FORTH VALLEY HEALTH BOARD [2015] ScotCS CSOH_34 (02 April 2015)

On the balance of probabilities, the court found that there was a spurt of blood on removal of the cannula, which was ignored by the radiographer, constituting a breach of the standard of care. The court accepted that, had appropriate action been taken, there was a high likelihood of a substantially better outcome for the pursuer. The defenders were therefore liable for the injury caused. The issue of contribution or indemnity between the defenders and third parties was not determined in this judgment.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_34
Parties
Pursuer: Annabelle Bell; Defender: Alliance Medical Ltd; First Third Party: Jackie McColl; Second Third Party: Forth Valley Health Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury/medical Negligence / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Liability established against defenders (Alliance Medical Ltd) for pursuer's injury.
Legal Topics
Standard of Care, Causation, Vicarious Liability, Contribution and Indemnity, Hunter V Hanley Test
Medical Negligence Tort/delict Personal Injury Standard of Care Causation Vicarious Liability Contribution and Indemnity Hunter V Hanley Test

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annabelle Bell

Pursuer

Alliance Medical Ltd

Defender

Jackie McColl

First Third Party

Forth Valley Health Board

Second Third Party

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury/medical Negligence / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the radiographer (first third party) breached the standard of care by failing to recognise and act upon an arterial puncture during cannulation for MRI contrast injection.
  2. 2 Whether the breach caused the pursuer's injury (ischemia and subsequent impairment of the arm).
  3. 3 Whether the defenders are entitled to indemnity or contribution from the third parties.

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, the court found that there was a spurt of blood on removal of the cannula, which was ignored by the radiographer, constituting a breach of the standard of care. The court accepted that, had appropriate action been taken, there was a high likelihood of a substantially better outcome for the pursuer. The defenders were therefore liable for the injury caused. The issue of contribution or indemnity between the defenders and third parties was not determined in this judgment.

Court Disposition

Liability established against defenders (Alliance Medical Ltd) for pursuer's injury.

Orders

  • Defenders found liable to pursuer for agreed damages of £700,000.
  • No determination on indemnity or contribution between defenders and third parties in this judgment.