§ PUBLISHED JUDGMENT · 2015

Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board

[2015] UKSC 11·Supreme Court of the United Kingdom·11 March 2015

A diabetic mother of small stature was not told of the roughly 10 per cent risk of shoulder dystocia in a vaginal birth or offered a caesarean, and her son was born with cerebral palsy. The Supreme Court held doctors must tell patients about material risks and reasonable alternatives, replacing the old doctor-knows-best approach to consent.

Outcome

Claimant succeeded

Sum stated in judgment

Not stated

Claim type

Clinical Negligence

Decided

Appeal decision

G
ClaimGavel Assistant
● Online · Clinical Negligence · free & confidential
FREE
TELL US WHAT HAPPENED — TYPE HERE

Start typing — your likely claim, value and time limit appear here.

Describe what happened (a sentence or two) to begin.

Free · confidential · not legal adviceEngland

§ WHAT HAPPENED

The facts, in brief.

Defendant: Lanarkshire Health Board

Injury: Shoulder dystocia during vaginal delivery; the baby suffered cerebral palsy from oxygen deprivation and a brachial plexus injury (Erb's palsy)

Specialty: Obstetrics · UK

§ WHAT THE COURT SAID

In the judgment’s own words.

“For these reasons, we would allow the appeal.”

The money

No sum stated; Supreme Court decided the consent/duty-to-warn issue and allowed the mother's appeal. Scottish appeal but the consent test applies across the UK.

§ WHY IT MATTERS

What this case shows.

Since Montgomery, a claim can succeed where a patient was not warned of a risk that a reasonable person in their position would consider significant, even if some doctors would not have mentioned it. It underpins most modern consent-based negligence claims.

About clinical negligence claims →

§ MORE CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE JUDGMENTS

Claimant succeeded£550,000

Alexander v HCA International Limited & Anor

[2026] EWHC 1284 (KB)·2026·Liability decided at trial

A patient developed life-threatening pancreatitis after a gallstone-removal ERCP. The judge found the consultant never prescribed or instructed the standard preventive diclofenac suppository, so it was not given, and entered judgment for £550,000 against him.

Failing to give a recognised prophylactic drug before a procedure can be negligent even in private care. The prescribing doctor, not the hospital, carried the liability here.

Claim failed

O'Brien v Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Trust

[2022] EWHC 2735 (KB)·2022·Liability decided at trial

A man with end-stage kidney failure was given a single 400mg gentamicin dose for a chest infection and suffered permanent balance and hearing damage. His sister's claim failed because the judge accepted that a high dose was a reasonable choice for a worsening infection with sepsis risk, despite his renal impairment.

A drug dose that causes known side-effects is not automatically negligent if it was a reasonable clinical judgement in the circumstances. Departing from a hospital guideline is not itself proof of negligence.

Claimant succeeded

Plan v El-Amir & Anor

[2020] EWHC 2902 (QB)·2020·Liability decided at trial

A 79-year-old with macular degeneration was persuaded to have an intraocular lens implant in her better eye without proper informed consent, then developed raised eye pressure that the surgeon left untreated for five weeks. Stacey J found the surgeon negligent both in consenting and in delaying laser treatment, causing total blindness in that eye.

Private eye surgeons must obtain genuinely informed consent and act promptly on post-operative complications. A delay that materially contributes to permanent damage is enough for liability even if some harm had already occurred.

All clinical negligence judgments →

Contains information licensed under the Open Justice - Licence v2.0. Judgments from Find Case Law, The National Archives. Summaries are ours; amounts only where printed in the judgment.

This guide is general information about the law in England and Wales, not legal advice about your case. ClaimGavel is run by Costart Projects Ltd on behalf of Tomlin & Partners, a specialist medical negligence firm regulated by the SRA. The free assessment on this page is an AI overview to show you roughly where you stand; a solicitor confirms the position in a free, no-obligation conversation.