Duty of Care and the Consultant

A recent ruling on the duty of care owed by a medical consultant highlighted a problem with the relevant NICE guidelines which, on the critical question for determination, pointed to contradictory management directions.

Sanderson v Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation [2020] EWHC 20 (QB) is a tragic case where the claimant suffers cerebral palsy with visual problems and learning difficulties, following a lack of oxygen supply to the brain just before her birth.

At issue was whether there was any breach of duty on the part of the consultant obstetrician in her care of the mother during the second stage of labour; and if so whether, but for that breach of duty, the baby’s delivery would have taken place earlier so that the period of oxygen deprivation would have avoided or shortened.

It was argued that the consultant’s decision to perform a fetal blood sample rather than deliver the baby urgently was a breach of duty; and the delay in the ensuing instrumental delivery represented a further breach of duty.

The consultant’s timeline of events was substantially agreed between the parties but, importantly, Mrs Justice Lambert pointed out the need to be realistic about the timings. She said a forensic scrutiny of timings 17 years later was bound to involve some imprecision; and in this type of case, “every fraction of a minute of delay in delivery may have an impact upon the Claimant's condition”.

The claimant’s expert witness relied heavily on the NICE Guidelines, The Use of Electronic Fetal Monitoring, to support his argument that urgent delivery was mandated. (NICE guidelines provide ‘evidence-based guidance’ for medical professionals and are not legally binding.)

But the expert’s reliance was “highly problematic” for Lambert J - she found apparent contradictions within the Guidelines as to the appropriate obstetric management in the presence of this particular trace feature.

On the face it, she took the view that the Guidelines appeared to advocate two contradictory management options in response to “a single prolonged deceleration lasting longer than 3 minutes: conservative measures where possible or feasible (expressly including fetal blood sampling) and a few short paragraphs later urgent delivery (fetal blood sampling being contraindicated)”.

So on the critical issues, the guidelines point in two entirely different management directions, pulling the rug from under the expert witness’s “thesis”. His opinion on the consultant’s management relied on an “almost formulaic application of sections of the Guidelines taken out of context”.

Lambert J said that apart from that reliance, he offered little in the way of alternative ‘real world’ analysis as to how the reasonably competent clinician should respond to the trace in this case.

The ruling

The Bolam test was applied in this case, that is to say, a doctor " is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in this particular art… Putting it the other way round, a man is not negligent, if he is acting in accordance with such a practice merely because there is a body of opinion that would take a contrary view". It is for the court to decide the issues taking into account all of the evidence.

As for the Guidelines on which the expert relied, Lambert J found them “useful so far as they go, but they are limited. The Guidelines do not provide a substitute for clinical judgement but must be interpreted by the clinician and then applied in the light of that judgement”.


Her conclusion on the facts was that without hindsight, the reasonable obstetrician in these circumstances would not be concerned that the trace suggested an imminent acute event. The trace mandated action but a reasonable response included performing a fetal blood sample. Urgent delivery was not mandated and a fetal blood sample was not illogical, rather it was an appropriate and reasonable response to the trace.

As for the ensuring delay in instrument delivery, the consultant was found to have acted as quickly as she could to achieve all that was required of her at the relevant time. It was not, for instance, unreasonable for to have spent three to four minutes away from the delivery room to gather the necessary equipment ahead of the urgent delivery. It was noted that it was an exceptionally busy ward with the practical difficulties of limited staff.

Hard as it was for the claimant and her litigation friend (who is her carer), the claim was dismissed.

It is interesting that the judge clearly gave a measure of weight to the working conditions in which the consultant was working at time. These are straitened times for the NHS with squeezed budgets creating or exacerbating practical difficulties that can, sadly, have a negative impact on the care of patients.

This reality is a factor that the court appeared willing to take into account when assessing whether the duty of care has been breached. To do otherwise would be an intolerable strain on medics.

As for the NICE guidelines, the court’s approach in this case was that they are useful as far as they go. They are a “a practical tool to be used in conjunction with clinical judgement” and formulaic, non-contextual reliance on them is not acceptable.

On the other hand, it is clear from earlier authorities that a failure to follow relevant guidelines – even if it was because they disagreed with them – could amount to negligence.



Back to the SOLICITORS group News

Media Centre

“The Solicitors Group online directory is an established and respected channel for legal professionals, meaning I can talk to my existing and future customers about products and services both quickly and easily.”

Carole Hatton
Marketing Manager
Landmark Information Group

“Reaching our niche market can sometimes be challenging, however we find promoting our legal training courses on www.thesolicitorsgroup.co.uk an excellent way of contacting both existing and new customers. The service we receive from The Solicitors Group is both professional and relevant to our core activities and we would recommend their services to others.”


“I must say that to date we have been very pleased with the referrals we are getting from your site.”

Paul West
Orchid Cellmark

“The Newsdesk feature on www.thesolicitorsgroup.co.uk is ideal for us. Its prominent location on the site provides a great platform to communicate key messages to existing and potential clients.”

Neil Phillips
Marketing Manager
Countrywide Legal Indemnities

"We are very happy with the referrals we are getting from The Solicitors Group web-site."

C.A. Bishop
Technical Director
Wickham Laboratories Ltd

“We received 419 click-throughs to our site from advertising with www.thesolicitorsgroup.co.uk”

Legal Prospects

“Putting myself in my potential client's shoes, I consider www.thesolicitorsgroup.co.uk to offer perhaps the clearest and most user-friendly listing of expert witnesses, especially in its choice of index terms.”

Ivan Vince
ASK Consultants

“The banner ad looks great”

Samantha Dawson
The Bundle Business Limited

“The Solicitors Group has been fantastic in helping us to raise awareness about bowel cancer, which kills 16,000 people every year in the UK. Bowel Cancer UK aims to save lives by raising awareness of bowel cancer, campaigning for best treatment and care and providing practical support and advice. Without the support of organisations such as the Solicitors Group we would be unable to carry out this vital work. We are very grateful to the team at the Solicitors Group for their support and assistance.”

Tamara Matthews
Legacy Officer
Bowel Cancer UK

“As a result of Law London, we have registered 208 new companies/firms to the website, generating £20,797 GWP to date, as well as reinforcing our presence in this very profitable marketplace.”


“The event was well put together and executed, and the traffic of potential customers for us was high. We had a number of enquiries regarding our services after the event and we feel our attendance there was important to our overall brand exposure. We feel a Law event of this size without Euromoney Legal Training present could potentially be hurtful to us as a business. We would recommend you to attend and shall ourselves be there again in 2008.”


“Many thanks for the prompt service.”

Martin Gibbs MBE
Director / Investigator
Griffin Forensics Ltd

“A targeted email to key customers is an invaluable method of communication, endorse this with the Solicitors Group branding, relevant editorial content and you have created a winning combination! We look forward to reading the next edition.”

Carole Hatton
Marketing Manager
Landmark Information Group

“Talking directly to Property Lawyers is critical to us as they are key customers or potentially could be for all of our products, The Solicitors Group offer a perfect solution to get our messages right to the right people”

Carole Hatton
Marketing Manager
Landmark Information Group

“Thank you for having a useful and informative site, it is good to see a comprehensive and friendly portal.”

Stefan Fann
UK Probate Services

“Cadogans aims to keep its brand image in front of lawyers who may be looking for engineering experts. A check on Google analytics showed that referrals to our website from The Solicitors Group website were above average.”

Daphne Wassermann
Technical Director