Negligence and consent in spinal surgery

Malik v St Georges University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 1913 (QB)

In a case turning principally on the resolution of questions of fact, the High Court has considered what symptoms the claimant was describing, the diagnosis by a surgeon of the causes of these complaints, the reasonable treatment alternatives available and the explanations given to the claimant about the respective benefits and risks of such reasonable treatment alternatives to enable the claimant to make an informed choice before consenting to the proposed surgery. Much depended on what was said to the claimant by the surgeon during an outpatient consultation, and there was a good deal of conflicting evidence.