Expert Opinion / Representation

Selected Cases

K v T – (Australia -NSW) advising legal team for claimant with regard to clinical negligence of failure to undertake appropriate diagnosis, failure to refer, failure to undertake procedure with appropriate care and attention.
W v K - (Australia-WA) advising legal team for defense with regard to allegations of failed procedure, failure to appropriately place metalwork, failure to provide appropriate after-care. H v Health Board (Wales): Instructed to determine and advise on allegations of negligence and failure to diagnose, failure to follow up post procedure and ongoing condition and prognosis, resulting in partial liability and settlement.
T v Health Board (Wales): Instructed to determine and advise on allegations of negligence delay in diagnosis, delay of referral, resulting in loss of limb, which were successfully defended by the Trust.
M v G (Australia -WA): Instructed for claimant in an allegation of negligence resulting in permanent disability and ‘non-union of joint’ surgery. Expert opinion assisted in securing a successful claim.
HS v Secretary of State & GWH (NHS) (2022): Instructed in a long running and high value claim against an NHS department regarding failed foot surgery to correct a Diabetic Foot deformity. Expert opinion and oral testimony resulted in partial liability and a reduced settlement.
FB v Secretary of State for Health & HH (NHS) (2018): Instructed in a case regarding failed foot surgery and loss of digit in a child. Resulting in a successful claim and compensation.
RT v JW (2018): Instructed in a claim of misdiagnosis, failure to refer and loss of limb against a practitioner Podiatrist. This case turned on interpretation of NICE Guidelines and failure to follow good practice. Resulting in a successful claim to restore and compensate the claimant.
SW v Secretary of State for Heath & WVH (NHS) (2017): Instructed in a claim of failed foot surgery, negligence and failure to heal. Expert opinion assisted in successfully resisting the majority of claims brought against the Trust. SS v Secretary of State for Heath & NFT (NHS) (2018-2023): Instructed in a claim of failed foot surgery, negligence and failure to heal, failure to diagnose life threatening sepsis, continued pain leading to further surgery and amputation Expert opinion assisted in successfully bringing the majority of claims brought against the Trust.
WV v CP (Pvt) (2018): Instructed in a claim of failed foot surgery, negligence and failure to heal, allegations of wrong site surgery and poor performance. Expert opinion assisted in successfully bringing the claim against the Defendant. Cam is appointed through the National Health Services (England) and the NHS Wales Panel of Experts. In addition he is instructed through Counsel in proceedings of the Australian Health Practitioner Regulatory Agency and the American Healthcare Lawyers Association
S v A (Insurer): Instructed to undertake examination and report on condition and prognosis regarding accidental injury in a private dwelling. Liability was admitted by the respondent. The respondents insurer was reluctant to honor the claim and instructed a further expert opinion to detail the injury, the impact and the likely prognosis of the injured party.
M v HBC (council): Instructed to opine and determine, following examination of notes and evidence of a claim against a council of injury on a rebar which was improperly placed. Successful claim for claimant against respondent.
M & B (Child) v IBC (Council): Instructed to opine and determine, following examination of notes and evidence of a claim against a Council run swimming facility, of an injury which occurred as a result of slipping on a wet floor. Partial liability and settlement
Norwich NHS Trust v Anon (2008):Commissioned by the NHS to investigate and opine on a large series of complaints against a Consultant Surgeon (13 separate complaints) for clinical mismanagement and misadventure, resulting in Disciplinary action against the practitioner.
HPDT and DJ v SE (2015 NZ): Instructed to opine by Counsel in a Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal action against a practitioner who was subject to a large series (5 specimen) complaints of professional conduct and clinical negligence - Fitness to Practice, with a sanction of dismissal from the Register. Full 28 day hearing with written and oral evidence, examination and crossexamination. Registrant exonerated of all allegations and charges with no further action to be taken.
Northampton NHS trust v Anon (2017): Commissioned by the NHS to investigate and opine regarding a complaint of negligence against an individual Consultant, resulting in the successful denial of allegations.
DE v JN with the BMI Hospital Group (2017): Commissioned by the MAC and Clinical Governance Lead to investigate and determine a complaint against a Consultant for negligence and inappropriate billing, leading to a settlement to the complainant.
HCPC v KT (2018): Instructed by Counsel in the defense of a practitioner who faced (27counts) Allegations of Sexual Misconduct. In a hearing lasting 28 days, the practitioner was acquitted of all charges brought against him following Expert Testimony of Intimate examination technique. The Registrant went on to be acquitted in the parallel criminal action.
AAPS v JK (2021 Aus): Chair of the Clinical Governance investigation committee in a case against a registered practitioner who faced 4 allegations of negligence. With 2 findings upheld the case was referred to AHPRA for determination.
AAPS v AK (2021 Aus): Chair of the Clinical Governance investigation committee in a case against a registered practitioner who faced 2 allegations of negligence. With no findings upheld the case was dismissed.
AAPS v CP (2021 Aus): Chair of the Clinical Governance investigation committee in a case against a registered practitioner who faced 1 allegation of negligence. With no findings upheld the case was dismissed with comments regarding future practice

Expert Opinion covers a wide range of activities. It plays a crucial role in the medical health and life sciences industry, providing valuable insights and guidance in various aspects of clinical practice, research, and regulatory affairs. Expert opinions are often sought for their specialized knowledge, experience, and ability to interpret complex scientific data.

There are a number of different types of ‘Expert’ in Medical, Health and Life Sciences:

Clinical Experts provide expert guidance on clinical matters, such as the diagnosis and treatment of diseases, the evaluation of new medical technologies, and the management of patient care. Medical experts, including physicians, surgeons, and specialists, provide these opinions based on their clinical experience and knowledge of medical literature.

Scientific Experts address scientific issues related to research and development in the life sciences industry. Scientists, researchers, and academic experts provide these opinions based on their understanding of scientific principles, experimental data, and published research.

Regulatory Experts have extensive knowledge of regulatory requirements and guidelines in the medical field. They may be consulted on matters related to drug development, clinical trial protocols, marketing authorisation applications, and compliance with regulatory standards.

Expert Opinions are often involved in:

Medical Decision-Making: Experts can inform medical decision-making for individual patients, healthcare providers, and healthcare organisations. They can help in determining the most appropriate treatment options, evaluating the risks and benefits of medical interventions, and making informed choices to help parties who may not agree.
Medical Research: Experts are crucial for evaluating the design, conduct, and interpretation of medical research studies. They can provide guidance on study methodology, statistical analysis, and interpretation of results.
Regulatory Approvals: Experts are often sought during the regulatory review process for new medical products and technologies. Agencies may rely on experts to assess the safety, efficacy, and quality of medical products before granting market authorisation.
Litigation and Legal Proceedings: Expert opinion is often provided in legal proceedings involving medical negligence claims, product liability cases, and disputes related to healthcare contracts or research agreements. Experts provide their opinions to the court or legal counsel to assist in determining the facts of the case and reaching a fair outcome.

Credibility of Expert Opinions is influenced by factors such as Reputation and Expertise in the field or discipline. Experts with a strong track record of research, publications, and clinical practice are generally considered more credible. The use of an evidence-based approach is important. Opinion must be grounded in sound scientific evidence and supported by relevant research findings. Crucially, Experts must be objective and independent. This is of paramount importance to the court and the parties in litigation.

My approach to Expert opinion, whether in support of litigation or acting as Expert determination, is to ensure that parties are issued with reports and evidence on time and in a fashion which is evidenced based, easy to follow and answers the issues at hand. The addition of legal qualifications allows a better understanding of the litigation process.