Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Breach of Duty of Care

    Uploaded by

    ANIS IZZATI BINTI AHMAD RAFFI
    7 views1 page
    The document discusses different types of tests and legal principles for establishing liability in medical malpractice cases. It notes that objective tests are unbiased while subjective tests depend on the tester's knowledge. It also summarizes several legal cases, including the Bolam case which found that doctors could be excluded from liability if they could prove their practice was established in their profession, and Rogers v Whitaker and Bolitho v City Hackney Health Authority which rejected parts of the Bolam principle related to non-disclosure of risks and established practices. The document advises that Rogers v Whitaker applies to assessing risks while Bolam and Bolitho apply to treatment and diagnosis in malpractice cases.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses different types of tests and legal principles for establishing liability in medical malpractice cases. It notes that objective tests are unbiased while subjective tests depend on the tester's knowledge. It also summarizes several legal cases, including the Bolam case which found that doctors could be excluded from liability if they could prove their practice was established in their profession, and Rogers v Whitaker and Bolitho v City Hackney Health Authority which rejected parts of the Bolam principle related to non-disclosure of risks and established practices. The document advises that Rogers v Whitaker applies to assessing risks while Bolam and Bolitho apply to treatment and diagnosis in malpractice cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views1 page

    Breach of Duty of Care

    Uploaded by

    ANIS IZZATI BINTI AHMAD RAFFI
    The document discusses different types of tests and legal principles for establishing liability in medical malpractice cases. It notes that objective tests are unbiased while subjective tests depend on the tester's knowledge. It also summarizes several legal cases, including the Bolam case which found that doctors could be excluded from liability if they could prove their practice was established in their profession, and Rogers v Whitaker and Bolitho v City Hackney Health Authority which rejected parts of the Bolam principle related to non-disclosure of risks and established practices. The document advises that Rogers v Whitaker applies to assessing risks while Bolam and Bolitho apply to treatment and diagnosis in malpractice cases.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    8Impersonal test- unbiased test

    Ujian objektif- unbiased

    Ujian subjektif- categorize ikut knowledge

    Based on the BOLAM case; as long as the D can prove that the practice is established/recognized in
    the profession then they can be excluded from liability. They can bring other competent (doctors
    etc)

    Rogers v whitaker tolak prinsip BOLAM because it involves non-disclosure of risks. Even u kata this is
    the standard practise

    Bolitho v city hackney health authority tolak prinsip case BOLAM

    Advise to risk- rogers v whitaker

    Treatment/diagnosis- bolam together with bolitho

    You might also like