header-logo header-logo

10 April 2008 / Andrew Harris
Issue: 7316 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Community care , Employment
printer mail-detail

Don't blame me

When should the finger be pointed at employers rather than medical staff? Andrew Harris investigates

A short while after childbirth in an NHS hospital, Mayra Cabrera died of a heart attack, caused by mistakenly being given the drug Bupivacaine intravenously, instead of the similarly styled saline drip. The two infusion bags looked identical and were stored in the same unlocked drawer; similar incidents have occurred in other hospitals. The coroner‘s inquest ruled that Mrs Cabrera was unlawfully killed after gross negligence by the trust; the widower called for a prosecution against the midwife. What should the test of negligence be in such cases? Do we apply the Bolam test, ie “not acting in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men, skilled in that particular art” (Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 All ER 118), to the hapless midwife, who put up the infusion, or a test of primary liability of the trust?

 

CONTROLLING MINDS

Currently for such

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll