Clinical Negligence
Thomas has a busy clinical negligence practice and is regularly instructed by both Claimants and Defendants across a wide range of medical specialisms. Thomas has experience of advising on cases that involve: all aspects of surgical negligence (including neurosurgery and transplant medicine), orthopaedics, obstetrics and gynaecology, cardiology, vascular medicine (including amputation), plastic surgery, neurology, and all aspects of emergency medicine, GP, and nursing care. Thomas has a particular interest and expertise in oncology matters following his involvement in the ‘inquests touching upon the deaths of the patients of Mr Ian Paterson for treatment of breast cancer’.
Thomas has a busy paperwork practice and is often instructed to plead matters for both Claimants and Defendants. Furthermore, Thomas has extensive experience of conducting conferences with experts.
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 regularly acted for families at inquests with a view to then pursuing clinical negligence claims.
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; (2) representing the family, at a week-long inquest, of a woman who died during a neurosurgical procedure; (3) representing the family, at a two-day inquest, of an infant who sustained a hypoxic brain injury; and (4) representing the family, at a two-day inquest, of an elderly gentleman who sustained a neurological injury following a fall in hospital.
Thomas is currently instructed as Counsel to the Inquest, led by Mr Jonathan Jones KC, in the ‘inquests touching upon the deaths of the patients of Mr Ian Paterson for treatment of breast cancer’.
Notable Clinical Negligence Cases
CM v A NHS Trust
Thomas was instructed as sole counsel for the Defendant in this matter. The case concerned the negligent failure of the Defendant to perform a check hysteroscopy during the course of a day-case surgical procedure, leading to a uterine perforation and small bowel perforation going undetected and resulting in peritonitis that led to the death of the patient. The claim was brought on behalf of the estate of the deceased. The Defendant admitted liability in respect of the above.
Thomas was instructed to draft a without prejudice Counter-Schedule of Loss and advise on quantum and thereafter to attend the joint settlement meeting.
The matter was pleaded at just short of half a million pounds, and settlement was achieved at the JSM for little over a third of the pleaded value of the claim.
JH v A NHS Trust
Thomas was instructed as sole counsel for the family in a two-day inquest into the death of JH. JH was born extremely prematurely and suffered a difficult neo-natal and post-natal course. As a result of these complications, JH required a surgical procedure during which he had a short cardiac arrest. Whilst on PICU following this surgical procedure, JH’s blood pressure was not adequately monitored and he sustained a severe hypoxic brain injury.
In the course of the inquest Thomas questioned seven clinical witnesses, including five consultants. At the conclusion of the inquest, the Coroner returned a narrative conclusion which was critical of the management that JH received and concluded that the severe hypoxic brain injury was preventable.
The civil claim arising out of the above remains ongoing.
LG (PR of Estate of TG) v A NHS Trust
Thomas was instructed as sole counsel for the family in the 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 Coroner also made a Regulation 28 report to: (1) The Royal College of Surgeons; (2) The General Medical Council; (3) NHS England; and (4) The Society of British Neurological Surgeons, due to her concerns following the inquest.
The Trust were represented by a silk and the surgeon by a senior junior at the inquest.
Following the inquest, the civil claim settled for a five-figure sum.
The ‘inquests touching upon the deaths of the patients of Mr Ian Paterson for treatment of breast cancer’
Thomas is instructed as part of the Counsel to the Inquest team and is led by Mr Jonathan Jones KC. 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 concerns that some of Mr Paterson’s patients died unnaturally, His Majesty’s Coroner has opened a series of Article 2 inquests. The inquests 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 and investigations into Mr Paterson’s practice. The inquests commenced in October 2024 and are anticipated to concluded in 2026/2027.
The inquests commenced on 7th October 2024 and since that date up until the start of March 2025 Thomas was the junior counsel in Court assisting Mr Jones KC.
Over that period, Thomas:
(1) Conducted the advocacy on two occasions. On the first occasion Thomas questioned two independent experts (a Consultant Breast Surgeon and a Consultant Clinical Oncologist). On the second occasion he questioned an Oncologist in respect of the treatment they provided to the deceased.
(2) Drafted ‘Briefing Notes’ for the benefit of HM Coroner. These notes summarised the salient evidence that was available in each inquest and assisted HM Coroner’s preparation for the individual inquests. These notes were also sent out to the Interested Persons.
(3) Drafted, alongside senior counsel, written submissions on causation for the benefit of HM Coroner. These written submissions set out advice as to how HM Coroner should approach the issue of causation in the inquests.
