Is it time to say bye-bye Bolam in medical law? - UK Essays.
The Eureka that greeted Bolitho may have not been sustained, although Bolitho has chipped away Bolam’s influence, but it is not exactly the big bang that some legal observers expected.
Question: Discuss the different interpretations of 'the Bolam test' (see Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 2 All ER 118). Critically evaluate the impact of the Bolam test in relation to key cases, particularly with reference to the Bolitho case. (see Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (1997) 4 All ER 771; or (1998) AC 232).
The second concerns the approach to professional negligence laid down in Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 1 W.L.R. 583. The claim relates to treatment received by Patrick Nigel Bolitho at St. Bartholomew's Hospital on 16 and 17 January 1984 when he was two years old. Patrick suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of.
Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority (1996) 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation.
The expert opinion given by the neurosurgeon called on behalf of the defendant GP was in accordance with Bolam, and the court expressly disavowed Bolitho from applying: at (105)-(106). 72. (2002.
The Bolam test was widely applied, meaning that it became extremely difficult for claimants to successfully sue for medical negligence. It was, for example, applied in the case of O'Malley, in which it was held that doctors should not be expected to inform patients of all risks involved in a.
Bolam (Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 2 All ER 118) principle is not extended, they still have an innate reluctance to abandon it in resp.