Particulars of claim for defective hip replacement
Produced in partnership with Conor Dufficy of 7 Bedford Row
Particulars of claim for defective hip replacement

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

  • Particulars of claim for defective hip replacement

Claim No: [Insert]

In the High Court of Justice

Queen’s Bench Division

Between

  1. [insert name]        Claimants

  1. and

  1. [insert name]        Defendant

  1. and

__________________________________

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

___________________________________

    1. 1

      The Defendant is a manufacturer of medical devices including prosthetic hip implants.

    1. 2

      The Claimant was fitted with DEFG prosthetic total hip replacement implants (the Implants) to his [left side OR right side] on [insert date] at the [insert] Hospital. In [insert date] the Claimant underwent an x-ray, followed by blood tests which revealed elevated metal ions, and he was advised to undergo revision surgery, undertaken at [insert] on [insert date].

    1. 3

      The DEFG System comprised an acetabular implant, a femoral implant and a taper sleeve, each manufactured by the Defendant. The DEFG System was a metal on metal system meaning that all of the components and, in particular, the stem and acetabular cup were both made of metal components.

    1. 4

      The Implants were designed, manufactured and supplied by the Defendant to another (for the purposes of sections 3(2)(c), 4(1)(b) and 4(2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (CPA)) on dates at present unknown but believed to have been in or around [insert month and year].

    1. 5

      In or around [insert date] the Defendant recalled the products from the market and issued an urgent field safety notice dated [insert date].

    1. 6

      The DEFG range of products has a revision rate of 32% after seven years; substantially above the

Popular documents