Wikia

Case Briefs

Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee

Comments0
556pages on
this wiki
Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee
UK

Citation

Barnett v Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee, [1968] 3 All ER 1068

Plaintiff

Barnett, the widow of William Patrick Barnett

Defendant

Chelsea & Kensington Hospital Management Committee

Year

1968

Court

Queen's Bench Division

Judge

Nield J

Country

United Kingdom

Area of law

Causation

Issue

Was the defendant’s negligence the cause of the death, or would it have inevitably happened anyway?

FactsEdit

Barnett's husband died from arsenic poisoning. He felt sick after drinking tea at work and went to the hospital. He was not admitted and treated, but was told to go home. The doctor was at home and would not have been able to first see the man until approximately 11:00 AM. Barnett subsequently died at about 1:30 PM.

IssueEdit

  1. Was the defendant’s negligence the cause of the death, or would it have inevitably happened anyway?

DecisionEdit

Judgment for the defendant.

ReasonsEdit

Nield, based on the evidence, decides that even if the man had been admitted to the hospital upon his arrival he would likely have died. There was only one antidote for arsenic poisoning, and it was not readily available and could probably not have been administered in time to save his life. In cases of cause in fact the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant’s negligence caused the harm. That means that they must prove that without the negligence, the harm would not have occurred. The wife does not do this here, as it is probable that the man would have died even without the hospital's negligent refusal.

RatioEdit

The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that the negligent actions of the defendant caused the outcome, i.e. they must establish that if the negligent act did not occur, then the damage would not have happened.

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki