- Scope of duty in clinical negligence (Khan v Meadows)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: On Friday, 18 June 2021, a panel of seven justices of the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the claimant’s appeal in the matter of Khan v Meadows. The decision was handed down along with that in Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton UK LLP which should be read in conjunction. Both cases were concerned with the application of the scope of duty principle, summarised in the earlier case of Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd; South Australia Asset Management Corp v York Montague Ltd, but the case of Khan is a rare example of the principle being applied to a claim for clinical negligence. In Khan, the court held that losses arising from a second, unrelated, medical condition, upon which the defendant’s advice was not sought, were irrecoverable as they fell outside the scope of the defendant’s duty of care. The judgment demonstrates the importance of first establishing the nature of the information or advice being sought from the defendant, and thus the scope of the defendant’s duty of care. Written by Greg McEwen, partner at BLM Solicitors.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial