§ CASE LIBRARY

Real medical negligence cases,
every one linked to the judgment.

Published judgments of the courts of England and Wales, summarised in plain English: what went wrong, what the court decided, and the sum where the judgment states it. We include the claims that failed as well as the ones that succeeded, because they show what you have to prove.

Judgments

152

With the sum stated

33

Claimant succeeded

87

Claim failed

59

G
ClaimGavel Assistant
● Online · medical 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
Claim failed

Edward Graham v Dr Simone Altaf

[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.

Claim failed£1.4M

Khan v Meadows

[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

Tucker v Griffiths

[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

Lillington v Ansell & Anor

[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

Hopkins v Akramy & Ors

[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

Wake (A Child) v Johnson

[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

Doy v Gunn

[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.

Claim failed

Canavan v Gaynor

[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.

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.

§ HOW TO READ THESE

Most claims never reach a judgment. They settle privately, and settlement sums are confidential. Judgments surface when liability is disputed, when damages are fought over, or when a court must approve a settlement for a child or someone who lacks capacity. That is why approvals and damages trials are where the public figures come from.

Amounts are only what the judgment prints. Where a case shows a lump sum plus periodical payments, the yearly payments continue for life and can be worth far more than the lump sum. Where no figure is shown, the court decided fault but the money was settled or assessed elsewhere.

Plain-English guides built on these cases →

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.