Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:48:09

From: Robert Stevens

Subject: Standard of care in contribution proceedings

I agree with you that Doctor A's inexperience may be relevant to the ultimate apportionment but I don't see what point it illustrates. A's inexperience could well be relevant in the question of whether A was at fault at all - the liability question.

It is not. Dr A is under a duty to treat with the skill and care that a reasonably competent doctor in that post would provide: see Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1987] 1 QB 730. Dr A cannot rely upon her own inexperience in order to say she has not been careless. This factor is irrelevant at the liability stage.

However, in terms of the apportionment as between hospital and doctor (or between doctor and anaesthetist) inexperience is relevant (Jones v Manchester).

Without checking a Canadian torts text, I don't know what the relevant Canadian authority is, but I would be surprised if a doctor was able to rely upon her personal inexperience as an exculpating factor when a claim for negligence is brought.

Robert Stevens
Barrister
University of Oxford

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>