enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Chester v Afshar - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chester_v_Afshar

    Causation (law) - Medical negligence - Tort law Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41 is an important English tort law case regarding causation in a medical negligence context. In it, the House of Lords decided that when a doctor fails to inform a patient of the risks of surgery, it is not necessary to show that the failure to inform caused the harm ...

  3. Hotson v East Berkshire Area HA - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotson_v_East_Berkshire...

    Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] 2 All ER 909 is an English tort law case, about the nature of causation. [1] It rejects the idea that people can sue doctors for the loss of a chance to get better, when doctors fail to do as good a job as they could have done.

  4. Gregg v Scott - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregg_v_Scott

    84. Academic writers have suggested that in cases of clinical negligence, the need to prove causation is too restrictive of liability. This argument has appealed to judges in some jurisdictions; in some, but not all, of the States of the United States and most recently in New South Wales and Ireland: Rufo v Hosking (1 November 2004) [2004] NSWCA 391); Philp v Ryan (17 December 2004) [2004] 1 ...

  5. Case ID: 120401997 Control No.: 15031068

    highline.huffingtonpost.com/miracleindustry/...

    Alternative, a New Trial, Because Mr. Pledger Failed to Prove Causation. 16. A plaintiff must prove both medical (factual) causation and warnings (proximate) causation to establish a prima facie case of a negligent failure-to-warn claim. See, e.g., Tidwell v. Upjohn Co., 626 So. 2d 1297, 1300 (Ala. 1993) (recognizing that to establish medical

  6. Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_v_Chelsea...

    Although the hospital had breached the standard of care, that breach was held to not be a cause of Mr. Barnett's death. [1] A doctor’s refusal to treat a patient who appears before him after swallowing arsenic is not a cause of fact in the patient’s subsequent death if it is established that even proper treatment would not have saved him.

  7. Medical malpractice - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_malpractice

    Medical malpractice is a legal cause of action that occurs when a medical or health care professional, through a negligent act or omission, deviates from standards in their profession, thereby causing injury or death to a patient. [1] The negligence might arise from errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare or health management.

  8. Medical malpractice in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_malpractice_in_the...

    Likewise, damage can occur without negligence, for example, when someone dies from a fatal disease. In cases involving suicide, physicians and particularly psychiatrists may be to a different standard than other defendants in a tort claim. In most tort cases, suicide is legally viewed as an act which terminates a chain of causality.

  9. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_v_Lanarkshire...

    The claimant sought damages from the health board for negligence on the part of the doctor for failing to advise her on the risk of shoulder dystocia. The Court of Session ruled that there was no negligence based on the Hunter v Hanley test and that there was no causation since the claimant would not have submitted to a caesarean birth even if ...