G v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust

Background

G was admitted to the Defendant NHS Hospital following a subarachnoid haemorrhage. She was admitted under the care of the consultant neurosurgeon who planned to operate on her subarachnoid haemorrhage on 11 February 2008. Unfortunately, the theatre list that was on the ward that G had been admitted to did not have her name listed for surgery that day. As a consequence, a member of nursing staff gave G a sandwich and a banana to eat.

While G was eating the lunch provided for her by the nurse, the consultant surgeon who was due to operate on her attended her bedside and was shocked to see that she was eating. Her surgery had been booked for that afternoon, but due to the fact that she had eaten food the surgery had to be cancelled. The surgery was relisted for the following day, but, unfortunately, in the interim period G sustained a further second bleed to her brain which caused her significant neurological problems.

G had to be rushed to theatre and although her surgery was successful she was left with neurological difficulties.

G instructed Anthony Gold Solicitors to act for her in connection with a proposed clinical negligence claim against the Defendant Healthcare NHS Trust. G’s medical records were obtained and investigations commenced into her potential claim against the NHS Trust.

The Defendant Trust admitted that it was in breach of its duty of care to G in the delay in performing surgery until late in the afternoon on 11 February 2008 because G was, in error, given food to eat at lunchtime on the day of her surgery which meant it was not possible to proceed with the surgery that had been planned for earlier that day. The Defendant also conceded that on the balance of probabilities had G been operated on earlier in the day on 11 February 2008, then she would have avoided the second bleed and also admitted, on balance, that if she had been operated on prior to her second bleed she would have had a better outcome.

Proceedings were formally issued on 7 July 2011, and service took place on 30 November 2011 following agreement between the parties extending time for service until 1 December 2011. A Defence was filed on 25 April 2012 admitting liability.

Expert evidence was obtained from an independent consultant neurosurgeon Mr Robert Maurice-Williams, Dr Brian Toone, Consultant Neuropsychiatrist, and Dr Nicholas Leng, Clinical Neuropsychologist. A roundtable meeting was fixed for 4 March 2013 to allow parties to negotiate settlement.

Unfortunately, G suffered from epilepsy further to the negligent treatment and suffered epileptic fits in 2009, 2010, January 2012, March 2012 and September 2012. As a consequence, she was unable to work and left her employment and signed a compromise agreement in March 2012. G had returned to her previous employment as a teacher but was unable to maintain this and had to leave her employment in December 2008. She then found alternative employment on a short-term contract until September 2010. She then found employment with another school in Streatham, London, but had to have time off of work due to sickness. In September 2011, a threat was made that if she was unable to return to work, then her employers would have to go down the capability disciplinary route. G’s union became involved regarding her employment issues and her union followed up various issues with her employers and thereafter she was referred to occupational health who suggested that it would be at least two to three months from December 2011 before she should return to work. Occupational Health suggested that she undergo cognitive behavioural therapy, and unfortunately, G left her employment in November 2011.

Fortunately, the Defendant agreed to pay an interim payment in the sum of £25,000 to G and she received this in January 2012.

Experts

Mr Maurice Williams has confirmed that G is left with left-sided weakness, uncontrolled epilepsy, problems with balance, some hearing loss in her left ear and left homonymous hemianopia as a consequence of the delay in surgery and the subsequent second bleed.

Dr Toone diagnosed G as suffering from loss of confidence and psychological problems, and he suggested that she may benefit from cognitive behavioural therapy on a weekly basis for up to 25 weeks and this would be aimed at overcoming her fear of having a seizure, combating negative thoughts and low self-esteem and building up her self-confidence. He also suggested that she should not take antidepressant medication, and he believed her epilepsy should be supervised by a consultant neurologist with a particular interest in epilepsy through the private sector.

Dr Nicholas Leng, Consultant Neuropsychiatrist, concluded in his report that G would be at significant disadvantage in terms of work for the future, and the combination of her problems not least her epilepsy means that it would be difficult for her to obtain work as a teacher. He recommended cognitive behavioural therapy 10 to 20 sessions and also suggested it would be helpful for her to undergo a vocational assessment to look at various strengths and weaknesses for her to receive advice about realistically what kind of job she should be considering with a view to her having a vocational rehabilitation programme. G was at a disadvantage in seeking employment as she had to provide details of her epilepsy and subarachnoid haemorrhage on any application form which meant that she was not considered for interview despite her academic abilities and experience.

G was left with visual difficulties which make it impossible for her to see accurately as she has 50% cut in her visual field. She also was left with an inability to remember which makes teaching a class of up to 30 children virtually impossible coupled with her visual problems. G also has reduced hearing in her left ear which makes working with continual background noise very difficult, and her lack of motor skills in her left hand makes dealing with and giving out and collecting pieces of paper difficult. G has poor short-term memory which means that it is easy for her to forget important facts or information and she has difficulty typing. She has poor concentration immediate and short-term memory which makes it difficult to maintain trains of thought when preparing resources and reproducing information to her students.

Offers of settlement

At the outset, the Defendant put forward an offer in the sum of £100,000 in full and final settlement of G’s claim. G rejected this. A further offer of £150,000 was then put forward which was also rejected. A third offer of £250,000 was put forward by the Defendant on 10 January 2012 and this was rejected by G.

A roundtable meeting took place on 4 March 2013 and after negotiations G’s claim settled for £550,000 which can be summarised approximately as follows:

General damages £70,000

Claimant Solicitor Stephanie Prior, Anthony Gold Solicitors

Defendant Solicitor Catherine Radford, Bevan Brittan.