Plaintiff in medical negligence proceedings was not a reliable witness

Medical negligence – appeal of High Court dismissal of medical negligence claim arising from hospital treatment – whether augmentation cystoplasty was an appropriate procedure for the plaintiff – whether the plaintiff was fully apprised of two alternative treatments for his condition – whether plaintiff was made aware of all the risks – informed consent – whether the trial judge relied upon an erroneous finding of fact for his conclusion that the plaintiff was not a credible or reliable witness – there was no basis for criticising the trial judge’s finding that the plaintiff was not a reliable or credible witness – whether the trial was fundamentally unfair because the trial judge permitted the defendants to lead evidence on certain matters relating to informed consent – whether the finding that the plaintiff was informed of the risks associated with augmentation cystoplasty was against the evidence – whether the trial judge erred in concluding that the plaintiff was not entitled to be informed as part of the informed consent process to be told of the possible alternatives – whether the burden of proof of informed consent rested upon the plaintiff – new ground based on the level of the defendants’ experts’ fees – appeal dismissed.