In my weblog on 21 April 2022, I summarised the choice of the Courtroom within the case of Natasha Colley, a contempt of Courtroom dedicated by the Claimant’s mom and Litigation Good friend. This weblog focuses on an extra judgment for contempt: North Bristol NHS Belief -v- White. The case considerations a declare for scientific negligence for Cauda Equina Syndrome the place the Claimant exaggerated the extent of her accidents.
The events in Miss White’s declare reached settlement in relation to legal responsibility – they agreed the Defendant pay 50% of the worth of Miss White’s declare. The settlement lined causation of Miss White’s Cauda Equina Syndrome however didn’t cowl the extent of signs stated to have been brought on by the Defendant.
Miss White valued her declare, in her Schedule of Loss, at £4.1 million plus a sum for common damages for ache and struggling. Following receipt of the Schedule of Loss, the North Bristol NHS Belief instructed surveillance brokers to video Miss White to entry her stage of mobility and capabilities whereas out of the home. The surveillance video footage confirmed Miss White visiting supermarkets, getting out and in of her automotive freely and simply, strolling with none obvious limp, slowness or incapacity. She was additionally seen bending down and sorting garments at the back of her automotive.
North Bristol NHS Belief served its Counter Schedule pleading elementary dishonesty and quantified the declare at round £34,000 plus common damages for ache and struggling. The Belief additionally issued an software to strike out Miss White’s declare.
The strike out software was heard by His Honour Decide Gore QC who struck out Miss White’s declare for her failure to adjust to Courtroom instructions, and ordered her to repay interim funds of damages totalling £45,000.
North Bristol NHS Belief then commenced contempt proceedings and the evening earlier than the listening to Miss White agreed a clarified set of admissions acknowledging that:
1. She advised her ache administration professional that “she was unable to stroll for 20 steps earlier than having to cease; if she didn’t use a crutch she was solely capable of hobble”.
2. She advised her care professional that “she couldn’t stroll for 10 metres earlier than stopping; she may climb slowly if she stopped each three steps; she may drive for 20 minutes; she used a crutch open air; she was unable to maneuver from kneeling to standing; she required supervision within the bathe and help together with her sneakers and socks.”
3. She advised her OT professional that “when she went out she used one crutch; she had excessive issue with kneeling, squatting or working at low ranges; she discovered it extraordinarily tough to get down on to the ground to play together with her son.”
4. She advised her neurosurgical professional that “outdoors she walked with an elbow crutch; she may stroll for 10-20 steps earlier than needing to cease and relaxation; she couldn’t get out and in of the tub.”
In a witness assertion produced following receipt of the surveillance proof Miss White maintained her that she had not been dishonest. She stood by her earlier feedback on the extent to which her disabilities restricted every day residing and impacted upon her private care wants.
The committal for contempt was heard by Mr Justice Ritchie on 24, 25 and 26 Could 2022. Ritchie J made a discovering of undeniable fact that between Could 2018 and January 2019 Miss White dishonestly and deliberately made false statements to 4 specialists who have been reporting to the Courtroom on her bodily situation. Within the context of a declare valued in extra of £4 million Ritchie J discovered past cheap doubt that the false statements referring to Miss White’s mobility had a price of at the very least £1 million.
In mild of this discovering of truth Ritchie J went on to move sentence for contempt.
Culpability and Hurt
It was famous that Miss White had been dishonest in a manner that she misled many specialists throughout her scientific negligence declare. She continued that dishonesty in her witness assertion regardless of being proven the surveillance proof which had uncovered her dishonesty. She confirmed no perception, understanding or regret in doing so.
As to hurt induced, Ritchie J pointed to Miss White’s conduct that put the NHS, by the Belief, to extra expense in acquiring professional reviews, expending authorized charges and finishing up surveillance and bringing contempt proceedings. Her conduct additionally resulted in beneficial Courtroom time and assets getting used. She induced expenditure to the Authorized Help system which can by no means be recovered.
Private Mitigation
Ritchie J pointed to the next components in mitigation:
1. Miss White had a 9 yr outdated son;
2. She lived together with her mom who supplied some care to her son;
3. Miss White had already suffered on account of her dishonesty. She misplaced the residual worth of her scientific negligence declare which may have been as excessive as £150,000. She recovered £45,000 of interim funds however was ordered to repay this sum;
4. Miss White suffered a horrible bodily problem on account of her degenerate spinal situation which first grew to become symptomatic when she was in her late teenagers;
5. Miss White had clearly suffered a significant depressive dysfunction (as evidenced by a psychiatric report) which had been recurrent and fluctuating. Her situation had a disruptive impact on her decision-making course of;
6. Miss White and her son have rights underneath the Human Rights Act to a household life, and Miss White has rights underneath the Equality Act 2010 on account of her bodily disabilities, and
7. The time that had occurred between the top of Miss White’s scientific negligence declare, the beginning of the contempt proceedings and the permission listening to. The proceedings had been hanging over her for for much longer than anybody would want in an excellent world. Nevertheless, the delays have been contributed to my Miss White’s failure to make full and frank admissions of her contempt till the final minute.
Sentence
Ritchie J held the place to begin for contempt of Courtroom is a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months. Because of the mitigating components this was diminished to six months. Consideration then turned as to whether the sentence ought to take fast impact or be suspended.
At paragraph 101 of his judgment Ritchie J acknowledged whereas sentencing Miss White “I take into account that you simply presently do current a danger to the general public purse and public establishments as results of your method to your scientific negligence declare in opposition to a tax payer funded organisation. I don’t take into account a suspended sentence would precisely ameliorate that danger. I take into account that you’ve got proven a historical past of poor compliance with Courtroom orders and guidelines referring to statements of fact within the scientific negligence declare and particularly your interplay with the specialists and your service of witness statements with statements of fact which contained dishonest falsities. No mitigation has been put ahead to point out that there’s any previous rehabilitation in relation to your interactions with the NHS Belief or the DWP or any reasonable prospect of rehabilitation in your interactions with State funded organisations.”
He continued at paragraph 103 stating “Lastly I don’t take into account that suspending the sentence will get the message throughout to you sufficiently strongly that: defrauding the NHS, which is funded by the tax payer is completely unacceptable. Nor wouldn’t it ship out the correct message to these presently suing NHS Trusts or those that will accomplish that sooner or later.”
Miss White was sentenced to six months fast imprisonment.
Remark
That is the third scientific negligence case in 5 months to have been the topic of contempt proceedings. Defendants and their advisers are clearly alive to the potential for claimants to magnify the affect their accidents have on day after day residing. Miss White’s case is one other instance of the necessity for claimants to be suggested on the consequence of constructing false statements, the very fact Defendants can, and do, search surveillance proof and the significance of verifying a claimant’s model of occasions.
Claimant advisers ought to as a matter after all conduct an in depth evaluate of disclosure materials (medical and DWP information, social media and different third celebration disclosure materials). Moreover, witness statements for claimants shouldn’t solely concentrate on what a claimant can’t do on account of their accidents, but additionally summarise what they’re able to do on a great, unhealthy and typical day.
On the finish of his judgment, Ritchie J set out an appendix of related sentencing in comparable circumstances. That is helpful studying for individuals who concentrate on medical negligence and private harm litigation – the judgment is offered on this hyperlink.
Additional data
If you need any additional data or recommendation in regards to the matter mentioned on this weblog, please contact Richard Lodge or our Medical Negligence and Private Harm workforce.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Richard Lodge is a Associate within the Medical Negligence and Private Harm apply and has been recognised throughout the area of scientific/medical negligence throughout the Chambers UK and Authorized 500 directories. He’s an individually ranked lawyer for scientific negligence inside Chambers UK, A Consumer’s Information to the UK Authorized Occupation.
