Clinical Negligence
Thomas has a thriving clinical negligence practice and is regularly instructed by both Claimants and Defendants across a wide range of medical specialisms.
Thomas has a busy paperwork practice and is often instructed to plead matters for both Claimants and Defendants. Furthermore, Thomas has experience of conducting conferences with experts, in order to assist in identifying potential strengths and weaknesses in parties’ cases, both in respect of liability and quantum.
Thomas regularly appears in interlocutory hearings, including case and cost management hearings and application hearings.
In addition to appearing in Court in respect of his ongoing cases, Thomas has also been instructed in a number of cases at an early stage. He has a particular interest in inquest work and has acted for families at inquests with a view to then pursuing clinical negligence claims. Thomas is currently instructed in respect of a number of inquests, including: (1) for the family of an elderly gentleman who died shortly after spinal surgery due to aspiration caused by post-op ileus; the inquest is listed for four days; (2) for the family of an elderly gentleman who suffered a neurological injury during a hospital fall; the inquest is listed for two days; and (3) for the family of a woman who died from infection having sustained a ureteric injury during surgery. Thomas also recently represented the family of a baby who died following hypoxic brain injury at a pre-inquest review.
Recently completed inquests include: (1) representing the family, at a two day inquest, of a woman who committed suicide a few days after being discharged from hospital following psychiatric evaluation; and (2) representing the family, at a week-long inquest, of a woman who died during a neurosurgical procedure.
Thomas is also instructed as counsel to the inquest, led by Mr Jonathan Jones KC, in the inquest touching upon the deaths of the patients of Mr Ian Paterson. The inquest is listed for 12 months commencing in October 2024.
Notable Clinical Negligence Cases
HM Coroner’s Investigation into Ian Paterson
Thomas is instructed as part of the Counsel to the Inquest Team for His Majesty’s Coroner’s investigation into Ian Paterson. Ian Paterson was the breast surgeon who was imprisoned for twenty years after being found guilty of seventeen counts of wounding with intent. Due to some of Mr Paterson’s patients subsequently dying, His Majesty’s Coroner has now opened a series of Article 2 inquests in respect of the deceased. The inquest will also examine wider issues of accountability and knowledge within the various institutions where Mr Paterson worked and will build upon the previously published public reports/investigations into Mr Paterson’s practice. The inquests are listed to commence in October 2024 and are listed to last twelve months.
LG (PR of Estate of TG) v Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Thomas was instructed as sole counsel for the family in a recent week-long inquest into the death of TG. TG was admitted to the Trust for a selective amygdalohippocampectomy to treat her epilepsy. In the course of the procedure, the surgeon made three aberrant tracts, all of which were of the incorrect length and of the incorrect trajectory, leading to TG’s death.
The inquest involved questioning seven clinical witnesses; three expert witnesses, including a Neuropathologist and two expert Neurosurgeons; and the Deputy Medical Director of the Trust.
The inquest raised issues in respect of unlawful killing. Whilst the Coroner ultimately concluded that the negligence was not ‘gross’, and therefore a finding of unlawful killing was not appropriate, the Coroner did return a narrative conclusion highlighting several matters of concern in respect of the surgery.
The Trust were represented by a silk and the surgeon by a senior junior at the inquest. The clinical negligence claim arising out of the above remains ongoing.
JJEW v MOD
Thomas is instructed to act as junior counsel for the Defendant, the Ministry of Defence, led by Mr Richard Grimshaw, in a case involving the alleged misdiagnosis of Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome (“PAES”). The Claimant, a soldier in the Army until his medical discharge, alleges that he was incorrectly diagnosed with, and surgically treated for, Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. The Claimant avers that the correct diagnosis was one of PAES and had that diagnosis been made at the correct juncture the Claimant would have, following correct surgical treatment, remained within the Armed Forces.
The Claim is pleaded at well over one million pounds and liability and quantum remain in dispute. The Claim is listed for a three week trial in the High Court in 2025.
