As a specialist and experienced clinical negligence barrister his work encompasses all aspects of medical malpractice. He is recommended in the Legal 500 for his Clinical Negligence work. He regularly advises on cases worth six and seven figures in the High Court.  A selection of recent cases include:

• Obstetric and midwifery negligence at birth;
• Hypoxic Brain Injury from different sources (including preventable cardiac arrest and stroke)
• Delayed diagnoses of cancer;
• Negligent prescription of chemotherapy and other drugs;
• Negligent operative treatment;
• Negligent treatment leading to suicide;
• Failing to provide adequate post-operative care;
• Misdiagnosis of torsion of the testicle;
• Surgical Instruments and/or other items left internally during surgery; and
• Hospital acquired infection cases, including MRSA and Clostridium Difficile.

Tom prides himself on his analysis of difficult causation points. He is comfortable advising upon technical aspects of causation and arguing them in Court where necessary.

In relation to quantum Tom’s work is dedicated to the detailed pleading that complex cases require.

Tom is equally at home representing Claimant’s or medical practitioners.

Tom is able to accept instructions on a public access basis from individuals, companies and other organisations including NHS Trusts.

Notable Cases

• TC v BGP - The Claimant suffered an above knee amputation and required lifelong prosthetics and care.  She had a reduced life expectancy and the question of whether Swift would apply to her accommodation claim and, if not, what other mechanism should be used to ensure proper compensation, was at the heart of the claim. To achieved a seven figure sum in settlement at a JSM.

• ZPQ v SSHNT - The Claimant suffered a brachial plexus injury at birth (Narakas Grade IV - the most severe).  Liability was never formally admitted and she received no Interim Payments to assist in her rehabilitation and development.  Finally a settlement was reached (and approved) in seven figures that allowed her to start to improve her quality of life and move forward into adulthood.

• LB v RX - The Claimant suffered a below knee amputation following injuries in a road traffic accident.  He changed solicitors close to trial requiring urgent advice and an Application.  The prompt action to do so brought about a settlement in seven figures where contributory negligence, causation and the honesty of the Claimant were all in dispute.

• IB v SWUNFT (ongoing) - The Claimant suffered obstetric injury and CP.  Liability, causation and quantum are in dispute.  The matter is likely to take many years to reach full resolution.

• AS v (1) PR and (2) WA - The Claimant was wrongly diagnosed with a significant cardiac artery stenosis.  She therefore chose to undergo unnecessary cardiac surgery and gave up her career to avoid stress.  She only discovered the misdiagnosis years later after she had moved out of London and completely changed her lifestyle.  The Defendant's both denied liability until a limited admission was made in one Defence.  The claim settled at JSM for a substantial six figure sum after receipt of Joint Statements.

• SML v SRH - The Claimant alleged negligently performed bariatric surgery.  The surgeon had deviated from standard surgical technique and she suffered extensive splenic injury.  The complications thereafter resulted in a long a difficult recovery, but the Claimant survived.  A significant settlement was reached between the parties.

• PZ v SGUH - The Claimant developed cauda equina syndrome.  There were primary and secondary care Defendants.  In addition to the usual causation dispute an interesting point about whether there was a delay in the transfer of the Claimant from a District General Hospital to a Tertiary Care Centre.  A substantial settlement was agreed.

[articles_area : 909 : 94 |&&| 28 : 100 : DATE]