header-logo header-logo

Finding the remedy for implants

26 January 2012
Issue: 7498 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Law commissioner advocates breach of contract as solution to implant scandal

Breach of contract could be the best remedy for the PIP breast implants controversy, according to law commissioner David Hertzell.

About 40,000 women in the UK have PIP (Poly Implant Prosthèse) implants, which were filled with industrial-grade silicone gel instead of the more expensive medical-grade variety. French doctors have recommended their removal, and discussions are taking place in the UK over who is responsible, what should be done and what type of legal claim might be appropriate. The manufacturers of PIP implants are no longer in business.

Health secretary Andrew Lansley has indicated that women whose implants were inserted on the NHS will be offered free consultations and removal if required, and he has said private healthcare providers have a moral duty to offer the same. However, several private clinics deny responsibility.

Writing in NLJ, Hertzell argues a breach of contract claim “could be easier to prove and potentially offer more generous remedies than other types of claim”.

“Breast augmentation surgery is classified as a works and material contract because the service (the surgeon’s skill and the operation) is so substantial that it is in effect the substance of the contract: the goods (the implants) are ancillary.”

Hertzell points out that the goods supplied must be of “satisfactory quality”, and that safety is an important element of “quality”. “If goods are of unsatisfactory quality, the consumer is entitled, within a reasonable time, to a repair or replacement, unless this would be disproportionate…Here, claimants would be seeking the cost of replacement implants and surgery. It is irrelevant that the implants have not ruptured.”

Any litigation will also need to take into account the psychological implications of implant removal, according to expert witness and psychologist Hugh Koch, of Hugh Koch Associates.

Koch says needing or having implant removal can cause psychological distress in a large group of women, and that professional treatment should be sought if this does not resolve itself within a short period of time.

Issue: 7498 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll