Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority
[1998] AC 232
Independent editorial summary โ not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
The Bolam test requires the body of medical opinion relied upon to have a logical basis. The court is not bound to accept expert evidence that is not capable of withstanding logical analysis, even if held by a responsible body of practitioners.
Facts
A two-year-old child suffered brain damage after respiratory failure. The registrar failed to attend when called. The question was whether intubation would have prevented the harm.
Judgment Summary
The House of Lords held the claim failed on causation. However, Lord Browne-Wilkinson clarified that the Bolam test is not a mere 'head-counting' exercise โ the court must be satisfied that the opinion relied upon has a logical basis.
Key Quotes
"The court is not bound to hold that a defendant doctor escapes liability for negligent treatment or diagnosis just because he leads evidence from a number of medical experts who are genuinely of opinion that the defendant's treatment or diagnosis accorded with sound medical practice."
โ Lord Browne-Wilkinson
Subsequent Treatment
Qualifies Bolam by requiring expert opinion to withstand logical scrutiny.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help