Close Glossary

Telephone 0800 068 8177 or contact us

Home  |  About us  |  Contact  |  Our people  |  Careers  |  The blog  |  Small print  |  Site map

Surgical Cases - Case Study

The People

H was a lady in her early 60s who had previously had both hips replaced. Unfortunately one hip was causing her difficulty and she had to undergo a revision procedure. The surgery was performed privately and not through the NHS.

The Problem

Revision surgery can go wrong and in certain situations that can happen without any negligence on the part of the surgeon. The surgeon argued that the damage suffered by H as a result of the revision operation was not the result of negligence. He also denied any negligence in relation to a further operation performed subsequently which certainly made the earlier damage worse. A very detailed letter of claim was sent to the surgeon but he continued to reject all accusations of negligence and court proceedings therefore had to be issued. There was a significant disagreement between the experts involved with the other side’s expert supporting the surgeon’s position.

The Solution

H was not eligible for legal aid and did not have any legal expenses insurance to cover the legal costs. Having carried out an initial investigation we offered H a ‘no win no fee’ agreement. An experienced barrister was instructed who also agreed to deal with the case on a ‘no win no fee’ basis. Insurance was obtained to protect H from the risk of losing and being ordered to pay the other side’s costs. Further attempts were made to explain to the surgeon’s representatives why his case was weak and that the claimant would in fact succeed. Eventually the other side started to show signs of interest in a negotiated settlement and H made an early offer to settle. As the case got close towards trial the other side’s position softened still further. However, in the light of additional expert evidence we were now placing a much higher value on H’s claim. Negotiations eventually resulted in us obtaining a settlement of £190,000 which was significantly better –by about 40% - then the sum H had originally been prepared to accept.

Who to contact

Marek Bednarczyk
Partner
Email
Request a callback