Medical negligence claim dismissed due to inconsistencies in plaintiff’s evidence

Personal injuries - medical negligence - plaintiff has brought this case seeking relief arising out of an incident on 1st May, 2003 when she was a day patient in to undergo a procedure for facet joint injection - claim is that when she was emerging from the anaesthetic, a servant and/or agent of the defendant sought to take a blood sample from her and she alleges that this was done without her consent - defence was delivered on 1st October, 2013 and pleads laches and/or inordinate and inexcusable delay in prosecuting the claim - plaintiff described many aspects of poor health and said that she suffered from injuries arising out of an accident in 1994 and that she had depression and anxiety and was taking anti-depressants - complaints of plaintiff - plaintiff claimed that the needle used to take this blood test was one foot long - evidence of medical professionals to include consultant anaesthetists, consultant psychiatrists - Legal submissions on behalf of the plaintiff and defendant - many inconsistencies in the evidence of the plaintiff - GP’s note taken the following day after the procedure which clearly indicates an understanding on the part of the plaintiff that she understood the reason for the blood test - plaintiff continued to deny that particular visit to the GP even though there was objective evidence available to the court - Court finds on the balance of probabilities, having heard the evidence of the anaesthetists, that the plaintiff was fully conscious and capable of giving and did so give a full and informed consent at the time when she signed the consent form - Professor Sheehan accepts that this patient has a vulnerable personality - Professor Sheehan makes the clear and subtle distinction that a person can have depressive symptoms without having a depressive illness as such as would come within the categorisation of a recognised psychiatric disorder - plaintiff's claim dismissed.