Henry has experience in a wide spectrum of clinical negligence work including cases involving midwives, surgeons, optometrists, dentists, general practitioners, nurses and care workers.
He has acted for a very wide range of clients, on both sides of the litigation process including private individuals, NHS Trusts, medical defence organisations and private medical and related institutions.
Recent cases include allegations relating to:
- Cerebral palsy
- Cauda Equina Syndrome
- Spinal myelopathy
- Failure to diagnose brain tumours
- Failure to appropriately manage pregnancy and birth including Erb’s palsy and still birth
- Failure to diagnose joint conditions, including in children Eg congenital hip dysplasia, SUFE
- Delayed diagnosis of infection, Eg leading to meningitis and brain injury or osteomyelitis
- Delayed treatment of eye conditions including genetic eye conditions, chemical burns and diabetic eye disease leading to blindness / partial sight
- A wide variety of complications arising from laser eye surgery
- Failure to diagnose / delay in diagnosis of cancer including to the breast, colon, kidney, oral cavity and skin
- Failure or delay in diagnosis of various fractures
- Failed cosmetic procedures, especially to the face and including, topical, surgical and laser treatment
- Failure to adequately manage or treat bowel conditions such as appendicitis, polyps, Crohn’s disease
- Failed cosmetic dental treatment
- Delayed treatment of periodontitis and other dental conditions
- Treatment in the prison setting
- Failed surgical treatment resulting in issues such as chronic pain, internal bleeding and peritonitis
- Systemic failures in administration and procedures at hospitals and clinics leading to delays
- Failed management of mental health patients
- Injuries sustained in care homes
- Prescription errors including steroids leading to Cushing’s Syndrome, Addison’s Disease etc
- Failure to obtain informed consent
- Failure to comply with data protection legislation
Mohammed Shah v Khan (1) & MIB 2023: Road traffic accident resulting in polytrauma and a traumatic brain injury to a young man. This resulted in care needs and a significant loss of earnings. The case requires a range of experts commenting on the relationship of cognitive difficulties to the index accident. Henry was led on this case by a silk.
Shazia Khousar v Nazir 2023 Manchester High Court: Road traffic accident resulting in polytrauma and a traumatic brain injury. A wide range of experts are involved including neuropsychologists, neuropsychiatrists, neurology and neuroradiology. There is a dispute as to whether the Claimant lacks capacity. The Defendant has obtained surveillance footage in an attempt to undermine the extent of the disability claimed. Henry was led on this case by a silk.
Cook v Eurowines Ltd 2023 Central London CC: Successfully had a claim for CRPS dismissed entirely despite an admission of liability being made. The Court used section 57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 to dismiss the claim accepting the that the Claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in the presentation of his claim. Oral medical evidence required at trial and surveillance footage used.
Richmond-Dixon v Wardle 2023 Nottingham CC: The claimant sustained a frontal skull fracture and developed subarachnoid haemorrhage causing moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Allegations of contributory negligence are being pursued against the Claimant. The Claimant is a young man just embarking on a career as a chef. There is added complexity to the case concerning whether rheumatoid arthritis has been caused or exacerbated by the accident. Henry was led on this case by a silk.
Bhatt v Royal Mail 2022 Central London CC: Traumatic brain injury affecting a young woman with a promising career. Claimant was part way through a university course at the time of the injury and therefore assessing the loss of earning capacity was complex. The matter settled at a JSM. Henry was led on this case by a silk.
McCarthy v Ali 2022 Manchester High Court: Traumatic brain injury to a young electrician who had accepted a well paid job in the middle east. The extent of the injury led to a loss of career and significant care and treatment needs.
Spencer v Fitton 2022 Manchester CC: Traumatic brain injury suffered by a retired pensioner. Arguments were advanced by the Defendant that significant care would have been required in any event. It was necessary to establish what extra care was required as a result of the injuries. A Swift v Carpenter accommodation claim was made.
ZH v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 2023 Manchester High Court: Cerebral Palsy claim involving a dispute on causation and quantum. Extensive expert evidence required. Although negotiation failed at mediation agreement was reached prior to the trial and subsequently approved by the Court.
Davenport v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals: Claimant alleged failure to manage intra-occular eye pressure which led to irreversible damage to left eye, the right eye was also under threat leading to the Claimant being registered as partially sighted.
Ross Yates v Portsmouth Hospital NHS Trust: Patient with oesophageal reflux underweight recommended gastric bypass surgery. Didn’t help the reflux and left him on weight gain powders.
David Fry (Dec) v Dr Barker: Failure of a GP to refer a patient for shortness of breath. Patient returned home and died early the next morning from massive pulmonary embolism.
AK v Dudley Group: Delay in undertaking mammogram led to the growth of a breast cancer tumour. The Defendant argued that because the Claimant had breast implants the tumour could not have been diagnosed sooner.
LG v University Hospitals Birmingham: The Claimant was advised to undergo a medical termination of an ectopic pregnancy. The hospital failed correctly interpret the scans and realise the Claimant in fact had a heterotopic pregnancy. She inadvertently therefore terminated the intrauterine pregnancy she did not know about.
William Ingham v Salford Royal NHS Trust: Claimant alleged a knee component had been negligently fitted and as a result he required ongoing care and assistance. Technical allegations about surgical negligence.
Susan Westgate v N Cumbria Hospitals NHS Trust: Misreported radiology led to a delayed breast cancer diagnosis and subsequent spread of the disease.
Judith Higson v Bolton Hospitals NHS FT: Hospital negligently prescribed patient opiate medication which she had a sensitivity to causing her death. The hospital argue she would have died anyway and they could not have known of the sensitivity.
Colin Ryan v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust: Delayed diagnosis of brain aneurysm and then subsequently brain surgery caused an extensive stroke in the patient. Multiple experts required on breach, causation and quantum.
Madison Kennedy v Alder Hey Children’s Hospital: Failure to undertake childhood hearing test led to misdiagnosis of profound deafness and the need to learn sign language. Missed opportunity to undertake cochlear implant surgery. Experimental research was necessary to investigate whether it would have made a difference for Madison. The Health Trust made an offer of settlement years before the research was complete. Madison is now attempting to accept the offer out of time. The question for the Court is whether in the unusual circumstances of this case it would be appropriate to make Madison liable for the costs of the Health Trust potentially consuming her damages via qualified one way cost shifting.
Deaville (Deceased) v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust: Successfully claiming bereavement damages pursuant to the Fatal Accidents Act from the Hospital Trust for a common law wife. Technically only legal spouses meet the requisite definition but the Fatal Accidents Act has been found to be in breach of the Human Rights Act in the recent case of Jakki Smith v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals . A large section of society previously excluded from bereavement award should now be able to claim compensation.
Braithwaite v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust: Claimant attended cardiology appointment in 1995 where a leaking heart valve was identified. Annual review of the claimant was required but no appointment arranged. The Hospital Trust blame the Claimant and put responsibly on a patient to chase up appointments. The Claimant is seeking to argue an adverse inference against the Hospital Trust that no appointment was arranged on the basis that the records have been lost and in any event the responsibility to arrange the appointment falls on the clinician.
Rana (Deceased) v Dr Caldwell: Deceased Claimant attended Defendant GP with allegedly unstable angina in April 2013. The GP sent the Deceased home with medication. The Deceased subsequently suffered a cardiac arrest in April and brain damage dying in July. The Defendant GP made an admission in February 2017 but sought to resile from the admission on the basis of new evidence in the form of supportive expert evidence arguing the angina was not in fact unstable. The Defendant also argues the Deceased would have died anyway even if admitted to hospital. HHJ Bird refused permission to resile from the admission and listed the matter for a trial on causation.
Khan (Disabled Patient by LF) v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust: Claimant, who suffers from severe learning disabilities, attended hospital with an eye infection and generally feeling unwell. An inner ear infection was not suspected, subsequently the Claimant developed a brain abscess and suffered a significant deterioration in function. The Hospital Trust allege because of the communication difficulties of the Claimant it was a challenging case and therefore reasonable to misdiagnose. The Claimant argues further efforts should have been made because of the disability of the Claimant and that a higher standard applies.
Quine v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 24 October 2017 DJ Coffey Liverpool County Court: The Claimant alleged that the Defendant failed to diagnose an Achilles tendon rupture causing chronic symptoms. The case hinged on radiology evidence. The Claimant sought to rely on radiology evidence served late. The Defendant successfully stopped the Claimant relying on any radiology evidence. This case was important because the Court emphasised that the general purpose of radiology evidence in clinical negligence claims was to solely comment on the scans and x-rays not to look at all the circumstances surrounding the scans such as medical examinations to support a particular interpretation of the radiology evidence.
SB (Executor of the Estate of KH) v East Lancashire Hospitals Trust, 5 September 2017 DJ Clarke Burnley County Court: The Defendant’s Hospital failed to inform the Deceased of concerning blood test results before she left accident and emergency having been kept waiting for many hours. The Deceased went home and two days later died of a perforated gastric ulcer. Henry advised the Estate and Dependents. The Deceased left an infant son who required additional care from his Father and was also on benefits. The case was of interest because we established a dependency claim based on benefit payments and also additional childcare when the law was previously unclear as to whether a claim could be advanced in these circumstances.
Harkin v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Trial, 23 – 25 November 2016 HHJ Beech Lancaster County Court: The case was a clinical negligence claim where it was alleged diathermy had been inappropriately used during surgery causing necrotic damage to a ureter and subsequent infection. The case was advanced on the basis that a diathermy injury can only be caused by negligence, essentially res ipsa loquitur. Such a finding by the Judge would have been significant for other claims involved use of diathermy and for doctors working in Obstetrics and Gynaecology (International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology ). The Judge accepted that the injury had been caused by diathermy but found this can have a non negligent cause.