Claims for implanted medical devices
Produced in partnership with Conor Dufficy of 7 Bedford Row

The following PI & Clinical Negligence practice note produced in partnership with Conor Dufficy of 7 Bedford Row provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Claims for implanted medical devices
  • What is the root cause of the injury?
  • Defective hip prostheses
  • Breast implant claims
  • Causes of action
  • Possible defendants
  • What constitutes a defective product for the purposes of CPA 1987?
  • Design or manufacturing defect
  • Defences
  • Limitation
  • More...

Claims for implanted medical devices

Guidance on care standards for cosmetic procedures is provided by the General Medical Council and came into effect on 1 June 2016. Doctors who carry out cosmetic procedures are required to advertise and market their services responsibly, give patients time to change their mind and prioritise patient safety. For further details, see Practice Notes: Cosmetic surgery claims and Cosmetic breast surgery claims.

This Practice Note focuses (for brevity’s sake) on prosthetic hips, principally, and actions for defective products. Claims for clinical negligence are covered in depth in other Practice Notes. For example, see Practice Notes: Duty of care and breach in clinical negligence claims, Clinical negligence surgical claims and Consent in clinical negligence claims—treatment and causation.

Product recalls and unfavourable publicity have led to a slew of claims in England and Wales (and elsewhere around the globe) in relation to metal on metal hips in particular. Although this Practice Note focuses on such prostheses the broad principles are applicable to other cases involving implantable devices/prostheses.

What is the root cause of the injury?

It is crucial in cases of this sort to determine whether or not medical negligence was the cause of the personal injury with which the claim is concerned. A defective prosthesis may be implanted negligently. The expert medical evidence obtained should specifically comment on the quality of the surgery itself—if only

Popular documents