Surena Masih & Anor. v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust
[2023] EWHC 1280 (KB)
Gbolahan O Somoye v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust
6 February 2023
[2023] EWHC 191 (KB)
High Court
A hospital admitted responsibility for a patient's death, then tried to take it back. The judge said no, because the hospital was slow to investigate and the family was unfairly disadvantaged by relying on the earlier admission. The hospital will now have to pay damages, even though they might have a good argument about whether their mistakes actually *caused* the death.
Key Facts
- •Dr Oluyinka O Somoye died on 7 March 2018 after undergoing a myomectomy at the defendant's hospital.
- •The defendant initially admitted liability on 24 March 2020 and reaffirmed this on 20 April 2021.
- •The defendant sought to withdraw its admission of liability.
- •The claimant argued that the admission should stand, leading to judgment being entered for the claimant.
- •A post-mortem examination and inquest followed Dr Somoye's death, with conflicting expert opinions on the cause of death.
- •Expert opinions differed regarding whether the hospital's negligence caused Dr Somoye's death or merely accelerated it due to a pre-existing condition.
- •The defendant's application to withdraw the admission was based on a change in expert opinion and newly obtained evidence.
- •The claimant argued that the new evidence was not truly new and that the defendant had ample opportunity to investigate the claim before making the admission.
- •The claimant suffered significant prejudice due to the admission leading to a limited inquest.
- •The judge considered various factors, including the conduct of the parties, the prejudice caused, and the prospects of success if the admission was withdrawn.
Legal Principles
The court has discretion to allow withdrawal of a pre-action admission.
CPR 14.1A(4) and PD 14 paragraph 7
Factors considered when deciding whether to allow withdrawal of an admission include grounds for withdrawal, conduct of parties, prejudice caused, stage of proceedings, prospects of success, and interests of justice.
PD 14 paragraph 7.2
Outcomes
The defendant's application to withdraw its admission of liability was refused.
The judge weighed the factors outlined in PD 14 paragraph 7.2, finding the defendant's conduct criticizable for delays and lack of proactive investigation, and the claimant suffered significant prejudice due to reliance on the admission. While the defendant had a realistic defense on causation, it was outweighed by these other factors. The court found the defendant's new evidence was not truly 'new' evidence.
Judgment was entered for the claimant for damages to be assessed.
The court refused permission to withdraw the admission, meaning the defendant's admission of liability would stand, leaving only the assessment of damages remaining.
Similar Cases
HM Senior Coroner for Cornwall and the Scilly Isles
[2024] EWHC 2673 (Admin)
Patricia Rogers, R (on the application of) v The General Medical Council
[2024] EWHC 567 (Admin)
Kelly Chilton v Michael Payne
[2024] EWHC 451 (Admin)
MAN v St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
[2024] EWHC 1304 (KB)