Legal News

The importance of experts in clinical negligence trials (Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust)

The importance of experts in clinical negligence trials (Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust)
Published on: 03 September 2019
Published by: LexisPSL
  • The importance of experts in clinical negligence trials (Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust)
  • What were the background facts to the cases?
  • Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust
  • What is expected of an expert at trial?
  • What did the courts decide?
  • Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust
  • What are the practical implications of the judgments and what pitfalls should clinical negligence practitioners look out for?

Article summary

Personal Injury analysis: Bryan Thomas, barrister at Civitas Law, describes two clinical negligence cases in which he acted for the claimant, but which had different outcomes as a result of the courts’ assessment of the expert evidence. In Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, the High Court found the evidence by the claimant’s expert fell far below the standard to be expected of a reasonable, competent expert witness with at one stage the expert even using an expletive. In Smith v Royal Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust, the County Court preferred the claimant’s expert and found the defendant’s expert to be ‘inflexible’. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents