If you or a member of your family, is the victim of a poor standard of medical care, then you may be entitled to claim compensation for Medical Negligence*. As one would expect, this applies to treatment by doctors, surgeons and nurses, but equally it applies to various other forms of medical treatment including dentistry, opticians, ophthalmology, midwifery and plastic surgery.
” We also seek in all cases to secure an explanation for the events took place that led to the said injury “
We believe that a medical accident has combined emotional and financial consequences for the victim and the victim’s family. In cases such as this, we endeavor to ensure that our client receives just compensation for the damages inflicted. We also seek in all cases to secure an explanation for the events took place that led to the said injury.
Many years of practice and experience have taught us of the relative difficulty in obtaining medical witnesses to act against another. We often find we must to look to those medical professionals outside of this jurisdiction in order to achieve justice for our clients. We, at Pierse Fitzgibbon, are proud of our unrelenting work ethic to achieve the appropriate result for our clients and their families and continuously strive to achieve that outcome.
For any information on our Medical Negligence* department, or advice on any relating issue please contact:
Principles of Medical Negligence Law in Ireland
Finlay CJ in the case Dunne V National Maternity Hospital (1989) set out the general legal principles in relation to professional negligence. Such principles are as follows:
- The true test for establishing negligence in diagnosis or treatment on the part of a medical practitioner is whether he has been proved to be guilty of such failure as no medical practitioner of equal specialist or general status and skill would be guilty of if acting with ordinary care.
- If the allegation of negligence against the medical practitioner is based on proof that he has deviated from a general and approved practice, that will not establish negligence unless it is also proved that the course he did take was one which no medical practitioner of like specialisation and skill would have followed had he been taking the ordinary care required from a person of his qualification.
- If a medical practitioner charged with negligence defends his conduct by establishing that he followed a practice which was general, and which was approved of by his colleagues of similar specialisation and skill, he cannot escape liability if in reply the Plaintiff establishes that such practice has inherent defects which ought to be obvious to any person given the matter due consideration.
- An honest difference of opinion between doctors as to which is the better of the two ways of treating a patient does not provide any ground for leaving a question to the jury as to whether a person who has followed one course rather than the other has been negligent.
- It is not for a jury (or for a Judge) to decide which of two alternative courses of treatment is in their (or his) opinion preferable. But their (or his) function is merely to decide whether the course of treatment followed, on the evidence, complied with the careful conduct of a medical practitioner of like specialisation and skill as that professed by the Defendant.
- If there is an issue in fact, the determination of which is necessary for the decision as to whether a particular medical practice is or is not general or approved within the meaning of theses principles, that issue must in a trial held with a jury be left to determination of the Jury.In order to make these general principles readily applicable to the facts of this case with which I will later be dealing, it is necessary to state further conclusions not expressly referred to in the case above mentioned. These are:(a) “General and approved practice” need not be universal, but must be approved of and adhered to by a substantial number of reputable practitioners holding the relevant specialist or general qualifications.
(b) Thought treatment only is referred in some of these statements of principle, they must apply in identical fashion to questions of diagnosis.
If a person sustains psychological or physical injury due to the negligence of another, including a business entity or government body, such person is entitled to apply for compensation for enduring such an injury. Personal injuries occur commonly with road traffic accidents, employer’s liability and medical negligence to name but a few.
At Pierse Fitzgibbon we take the pressure off individuals intending to apply for compensation and give expert consultation about their application. Our firm has over forty years experience in dealing with Personal Injury claims and have recently been involved in a number of complex multi-million euro cases.
For further information information on the above issues, please click on the following links:
For any information on our personal injury department or for advice relating to an accident please contact:
Michael Fitzpatrick (Head of Department)
Riobard Pierse (Partner)
Helena O’Carroll (Solicitor)
Robert Pierse (Consultant)