Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal, in circumstances where it had previously upheld the High Court's decision dismissing the plaintiff's claim that a cancerous lesion was missed during a breast examination at a clinic, grants an order for costs to the defendant. The plaintiff's appeal was rejected on the basis that the lump was more likely a benign cyst, negating the need to address allegations of negligence. The plaintiff's subsequent request for no order as to costs was also denied, with the court affirming the defendant's entitlement to costs due to their complete success in the case.
Court of Appeal, medical misdiagnosis, breast examination, benign cyst, cancerous lesion, negligence, breach of duty, evidence, public importance, breast cancer screening, aspirate, costs, Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, prima facie right, successful party.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.