This is a claim where our client alleged clinical negligence against her former GP and another GP within the practice following their management of her right knee, prior to referral to hospital.

Having obtained medical evidence, it was clear that, from a causation point of view, only one of the GP's negligence to adequately treat had placed our client in a worse position than would have been but for the negligence. Our orthopaedic expert evidence was that, as a consequence of the negligent treatment, our client suffered septic arthritis; that the client would, in any event, have required a total knee replacement by about the age of 72½ but that, as a consequence of the negligence, our client would have suffered increasingly severe symptoms from the age of 50 before requiring a knee replacement at 60. Thus, the need for the total knee replacement had been brought forward by twelve and a half years. Accordingly, proceedings were discontinued against the GP where we were unable to show a causal link.

The Defence received offered some admissions but they did not accept the date when we believed the breach of duty occurred. This was important from a causation point of view. If we had accepted the date when the Defendant believed the breach of duty had occurred, we had been told by our causation expert that our client would have been in exactly the same position as if treated appropriately and, thus, there would be no entitlement to damages. Accordingly, we progressed the claim towards a final hearing and it was a mere three weeks before trial that, after a discussion with them, the Defendant made an offer of £100,000, which was accepted.