This site uses cookies.

Diamond v Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 585, [2019] All ER (D) 53 (Apr) - Laura Johnson, 1 Chancery Lane

06/06/19. The Court of Appeal upheld the first instance decision that although a surgeon who had repaired the appellant's hernia using an abdominal mesh had breached his duty by providing her with inadequate information about alternatives to that procedure, the breach had not caused her injury or damage because she would have opted for the same procedure even if proper consent had been obtained.

Facts

The appellant underwent spinal surgery which used an abdominal approach. She later developed a significant post-operative abdominal hernia which was repaired by a surgeon using a mesh to support the abdominal wall. The appellant consulted the surgeon two years later when she was considering future pregnancy and wanted to know more about whether the mesh would pose any risks. He advised her about some risks and how they might need to be managed. She later consulted another surgeon, who told her that it was not advisable for her to become pregnant because of the presence of the mesh. She did not, in fact, go on to have any more children.

The appellant brought proceedings in the High Court pursuing a range of complaints. One of her claims was that the surgeon who repaired the hernia had not provided her with proper information about either the impact the use of a mesh might have on a future pregnancy or the alternative of undergoing a suture repair without the use of a mesh.

The High Court found that the surgeon had been in breach of his duty in two respects...

 

 

Image ©iStockphoto.com/STEFANOLUNARDI

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.