Description
Book SynopsisThe articles address the key areas of legal controversy that exist in the ongoing defining of the parameters of medical negligence litigation in Ireland. Each article is presented as a response to a specific question which defines the issue that is being further clarified or has been recently resolved. These issues include: • the revised definition of the standard of care in medical negligence litigation; • the emerging understanding of a cause of action based upon informed consent; • the existence of a cause of action for nervous shock of a relative of someone who has received negligent medical care; • the existence of a cause of action for wrongful birth; • the status of blind reviews, hindsight bias and intra-observer variability in the analysis of evidence; • the test for causation as a ‘but for’ test and/or one of ‘material contribution’; • the effect of the resolution of a claim for damages upon a subsequent claim by a statutory dependant, after the death of the original claimant • the wider time limits for the institution of medical negligence proceedings; • the tolerance of issuing proceedings but not serving them in medical negligence litigation; • the effects of the statutory duty of disclosure upon the defence of medical negligence litigation; • the implications of mediation for the defence of a medical negligence action; • the constitutionality of the Personal Injuries Guidelines of the Judicial Council in so far as they establish a statutory cap upon general damages; This volume is also written as a festschrift in honour of Mr Justice Kevin Cross to mark his unique contribution to the development of the law, together with his facilitation of the hearing of cases, in this area for many years prior to his retirement as a Judge of the High Court in 2021.
Table of ContentsContent Includes • Has the duty of care for medical professionals been changed by the introduction of the test of ‘the standard of approach’ into the duty of care? (Julia Best and Oisín Quinn SC) • Is there a new understanding of a cause of action based upon informed consent? (Eoghan Quinn and Luán ó Braonáin SC) • Does a cause of action arise for nervous shock through witnessing the harm caused to a family member by reason of medical negligence and if so, in what circumstances does it arise? (Hugh O’Leary and Adrienne Egan SC) • Is there a cause of action for wrongful birth? (Sophie Treacy and Timothy O’Leary SC) • Forward to the past: are the concepts of a blind review, hindsight bias and intra-observer variability now established in medical negligence litigation practice? (Ashling Gallagher and Conor Halpin SC) • Has causation in medical negligence litigation now moved from the ‘but for’ test to one of ‘material contribution’? (Anne Spillane and Eoin McCullough SC) • Are the time limits for medical negligence litigation essentially different to those which apply in personal injuries litigation? (Trinity Geddis and Richard Kean SC) • Does the resolution of a claim of a parent for damages prohibit a subsequent claim by a statutory dependant, after the death of the parent, for the loss of the free services of that parent? (Kate McCullough and Oonah McCrann SC) • Are there adverse implications for the parties in a medical negligence action in engaging in mediation prior to trial? (Fionn O’Callaghan and Sara Moorhead SC)
