To list or not to list, that is the question To list or not to list, that is the question

To list or not to list, that is the question

This judgment appears to provide some clarity on an issue about which seemingly conflicting advice is given to experts. It concerns the listing of...
Graham Harry Moore v Sarah Joanne Pochin MP & Anor [2025] EWHC 3012 (KB) Graham Harry Moore v Sarah Joanne Pochin MP & Anor [2025] EWHC 3012 (KB)

Graham Harry Moore v Sarah Joanne Pochin MP & Anor [2025] EWHC 3012 (KB)

The Petitioner, who was one of 15 candidates in an English Parliamentary By-Election, alleged that his vote count of 50 was fraudulently...
Not a fundamentally dishonest stroke victim Not a fundamentally dishonest stroke victim

Not a fundamentally dishonest stroke victim

This is an important judgment for experts instructed in cases where there is an issue as to whether thrombolysis should have been carried out...
Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

In this month's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we explore recent developments in Transparency and Open Justice. You can also catch our...
A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness

Vanessa Jane Davies is the founder of Skin Camouflage Services, an independent expert practice offering paramedical skin camouflage, non-invasive scar...
Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence

Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence

Today is the start of the 24th UK Pro Bono Week. In this extra edition of the Expert Matters Podcast we discuss the EWI's recent Partnership with...
A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness

We speak to a consultant Speech and Language Therapist providing assessments for Special Educational Need (SEND) tribunals and writing medicolegal...
Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness

October 10th is World Mental Health Day and in this month's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we look at the issue of wellbeing and...
A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness

Dr Richard Taylor is an Expert in the identification, verification and valuation of diamonds, gemstones, jewellery, watches, silver and antiques. He...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Consent – post-Montgomery
Keith Rix 1981

Consent – post-Montgomery

byKeith Rix

 

Commentary

Although this is a dental/maxillofacial negligence case, it is of importance for all healthcare experts instructed in cases where consent may be an issue. It highlights points about which experts should enquire when there may be an issue as to consent to a surgical or other procedure. In this case it was found that the consent process was deficient in a number of respects. It is also a case which illustrates how expert evidence can separately assist the court on the issues of breach of duty, causation, condition and prognosis.

Learning points:

General

  • When exploring consent:

    • Consider any national or local guidelines concerning the procedure.

    • Check for consistency between the consent form and any published guidance.

    • Ask what literature, if any was provided, or advice given as to internet sources of information.

    • Ask what opportunity there was to ask questions and discuss the procedure.

    • Ask what explanation there was of material risks.

    • Ask what alternative procedures were discussed.

    • Ask whether the opportunity was given to discuss the procedure with anyone else such as a family member.

    • Ask how long the consent process took.

    • Ask how the consent form was completed.

  • Readily altering your opinion on key points may suggest to the court that there is a lack of clarity and rigour in your analysis.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.