Content by Christopher Lowe

In this blog, Chris Lowe reviews the current requirements for proving medical causation in NIHL claims, reviewing recent practice in relation to the “Guidelines…” paper and considering the “R3” requirement With an ever-decreasing pool of viable NIHL claims, novel battle grounds inevitably develop. One such battle ground is the so-called ‘sliding-scale’ approach to the requirements…

The topic of consent has been increasingly contentious since the Supreme Court’s decision in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] AC 1430, which shifted the focus from Bolam-style clinical paternalism to patient autonomy.  On 9 November 2020, the General Medical Council (“GMC”) issued updated guidance on “Decision making and consent”. It is a revision of the core…

In Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] 1 AC 1430, the Supreme Court held that “[t]he doctor is … under a duty to take reasonable care to ensure that the patient is aware of any material risks involved in any recommended treatment, and of any reasonable alternative or variant treatments. The test of materiality is whether, in…

In our latest article, Christopher Lowe breaks down recent court judgments in regards to informed consent. Click here to read the full article.