Claimant succeeded
[2025] EWHC 3056 (KB)·2025·Liability decided at trial
A 49-year-old man saw his GP with breathlessness and a persistent cough; the GP ordered a chest X-ray on the computer system but the judge found she never told him to go to the walk-in radiology department. The court held he would have attended if told and was not himself at fault.
Ordering a test is not enough; the patient must be told clearly what to do. Courts are slow to blame patients for not chasing a test they did not know had been requested.
Claimant succeeded
[2025] EWHC 1261 (KB)·2025·Liability decided at trial
Ms Hodgson saw a locum GP who suspected pelvic inflammatory disease but did not examine her or arrange urgent follow-up, and a second GP reviewing her blood results by telephone did not refer her for examination. The delay in treatment led to an abscess, removal of a fallopian tube and chronic pelvic pain.
When a GP suspects a serious infection, the court expects an examination or urgent referral to rule it out, and a telephone review of test results does not replace that. Both GPs were held liable, with damages to be decided separately.
Claimant succeeded
[2024] EWHC 390 (KB)·2024·Liability decided at trial
Mr Gahir went to his GP with fever, severe headache, nausea and confusion; the GP diagnosed migraine, and he was not admitted to hospital until 55 hours later, when herpes simplex encephalitis was treated with acyclovir. The judge found the combination of fever, headache and confusion required urgent hospital referral and that earlier treatment would have left him far less disabled.
Fever, headache and confusion together are a recognised red flag for brain infection, and a GP who attributes them to migraine without arranging urgent admission may be found negligent. The judge accepted the family's account of the patient's confusion during the consultation.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 1911 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A woman attended a GP drop-in clinic with groin pain after an injection had missed the vein; the GP diagnosed a haematoma and sent her away with painkillers, and days later she was admitted with necrotising fasciitis and her right leg was amputated at the hip. The judge found the GP's examination and diagnosis were ones a reasonable body of GPs would support, so the claim failed despite the defendant accepting that referral would have saved her leg.
Even where a devastating outcome and causation are accepted, a claim fails unless the clinician's decision fell outside what a responsible body of practitioners would have done. A properly documented history and examination that reasonably excluded infection was a complete defence.
Claim failed
[2023] EWHC 156 (KB)·2023·Liability decided at trial
A three-year-old was diagnosed with tonsillitis by a GP registrar, deteriorated over the next two days and was then referred to hospital, where meningococcal meningitis was diagnosed. The court found no causative breach of duty and dismissed the claim.
Meningitis claims against GPs often fail because early symptoms genuinely resemble common childhood infections; the claimant must show both that the GP fell below a reasonable standard and that earlier referral would have changed the outcome.
Claimant succeeded
[2021] EWHC 2293 (QB)·2021·Liability decided at trial
A young man saw his GP with slurred, very unclear speech and suffered a stroke four days later, but did not sue until 2017. The court found he had the mental capacity to bring a claim and had known enough by December 2010, yet allowed the late claim to go ahead.
Arguing that a brain injury left you unable to run a claim will be tested hard against your medical records and everyday dealings. Even so, a claim brought years late can survive if the records mean a fair trial is still possible.
Claim failed£1.4M
[2021] UKSC 21·2021·Appeal decision
A GP negligently failed to arrange proper testing, so a woman wrongly believed she did not carry the haemophilia gene and went on to have a son with haemophilia who also had autism. The Supreme Court held the GP was liable only for the haemophilia-related costs, because the purpose of the advice was to guard against that risk, not the unrelated risk of autism.
Damages are limited to losses falling within the scope of the duty the doctor undertook. Even where negligence clearly led to a child's birth, unrelated conditions that the advice was never meant to address are not recoverable.
Claim failed
[2020] EWHC 3445 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial
A two-and-a-half-year-old girl seen at a Badger out-of-hours centre was diagnosed with a sore throat and sent home; two days later scans showed hydrocephalus and brain abnormalities needing emergency neurosurgery, leaving her profoundly disabled. This judgment decided only whether the NHS commissioning body was legally responsible for the nurse practitioner's alleged negligence, and held it was not.
When an NHS body contracts an outside provider to run out-of-hours services, the NHS body does not automatically carry a non-delegable duty for that provider's clinicians. Claims must be brought against the clinician and the out-of-hours provider themselves.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 1214 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
A patient with a prosthetic aortic valve had abnormal inflammatory markers on blood tests in November 2010; his GP arranged a routine appointment rather than urgent hospital admission and he suffered a stroke from endocarditis in January 2011. The judge found the results did not ground a reasonable suspicion of endocarditis and the GP's response was one a reasonable body of GPs would take.
Abnormal blood results must be acted on, but the level of urgency required depends on what a reasonable GP would have suspected at the time; a routine review can be acceptable where the overall picture did not point to a serious diagnosis.
Claim failed
[2016] EWHC 351 (QB)·2016·Liability decided at trial
A woman with cystitis took a leftover antibiotic, vomited for days and drank large amounts of water; she saw two GPs on the same day and collapsed with seizures early the next morning with a sodium level of 105. Hickinbottom J held neither GP was required to admit her to hospital on what they saw, and the claim was dismissed.
A GP is judged on the symptoms presented at the time, not on what a later blood test revealed. Persistent vomiting alone did not oblige hospital admission on these facts.
Claim failed
[2015] EWHC 276 (QB)·2015·Liability decided at trial
A four-year-old with fever, headache and vomiting was seen at an out-of-hours walk-in centre on New Year's Day and sent home with advice to return if he did not improve; the next evening he was admitted with meningitis and was left severely disabled. The judge held the GP's management was within the range of acceptable practice and dismissed the claim.
A feverish child sent home with safety-netting advice is not automatically a negligent consultation; the court asks whether a reasonable GP could have acted the same way. Hindsight about a devastating outcome does not prove breach of duty.
Claim failed
[2013] EWCA Civ 547·2013·Appeal decision
A six-week-old premature baby was seen at an out-of-hours clinic, diagnosed with colic and not referred to hospital; he developed bacterial meningitis and was left severely disabled. The trial judge accepted the GP's contemporaneous note over the mother's recollection of symptoms and found no negligence, and the Court of Appeal upheld that decision.
Even where earlier hospital referral would have prevented the injury, the claim fails if the court accepts the GP's record of what the child looked like at the consultation. Contemporaneous clinical notes can outweigh a parent's later recollection.
Claimant succeeded£7,500
[2013] EWHC 600 (QB)·2013·Liability and damages decided at trial
A woman with months of bloating and bowel symptoms was urgently referred by her GP, but the judge found he never told her and the hospital lost the letter, so nothing happened until she was diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer seven months later. The GP was liable for the delay but only £7,500 was awarded because the delay was not shown to have shortened her life.
A GP must tell the patient an urgent referral has been made so it can be chased. Damages for delayed cancer diagnosis are limited to what the delay actually caused, which may be modest.
Claimant succeeded
[2012] EWHC 3063 (QB)·2012·Liability decided at trial
A man showed his GP an itchy, bleeding growth in his groin and was told it was a harmless wart; seven months later it was found to be a thick, ulcerated melanoma. Bean J rejected the claim that earlier treatment would have cured him but found the delay cut his life expectancy by three years.
An itching or bleeding skin lesion should prompt specialist referral, not reassurance. Even where cure cannot be proved, compensation can be recovered for a proven shortening of life.
Claimant succeeded
[2011] EWHC 219 (QB)·2011·Liability decided at trial
A GP re-examined a nine-week-old baby's hips after a colleague had noted they were stiff, recorded them as seeming fine and did not refer her to an orthopaedic specialist; the dislocated right hip was only discovered when she was seven and needed major surgery. The judge found the GP should have detected the limited hip movement and referred immediately, and that early referral would have led to simpler treatment.
When an infant hip check raises concern, a GP must refer for specialist assessment rather than arranging a distant re-check. Missing a dislocated hip in infancy turns a condition treatable with a splint into one needing major surgery.
Claimant succeeded
[2011] EWHC 13 (QB)·2011·Liability decided at trial
A fourteen-year-old with days of high fever, vomiting and lethargy was not admitted to hospital by her GP on the Saturday, and the out-of-hours doctor that night managed her by phone instead of visiting; by the time she reached A&E the next morning she deteriorated and suffered irreversible brain damage. The judge found both doctors liable but dismissed the claim against the hospital because it could not be proved when the damage occurred.
A GP who recognises a possible pneumonia in a seriously unwell child but defers investigation for two days, and an out-of-hours doctor who does not visit despite worrying symptoms, can both be held liable when earlier admission would have avoided the injury. A hospital's breach does not lead to liability unless the timing of the damage can be linked to it.