Blogs & News

Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels In clinical negligence and personal injury litigation, the threshold for establishing a diagnosis of epilepsy is frequently a point of contention. Misidentification of non-epileptic events—or, conversely, the failure to recognise ictal phenomena—can lead to profound implications regarding causation, prognosis, and the apportionment of damages. Experts must distinguish between clinical…

Photo by RDNE Stock project via Pexels The Evidentiary Foundation for Neurology Claims In neurology litigation, the strength of an expert report is contingent upon the completeness of the underlying medical records. For traumatic brain injury (TBI) claims, the expert must synthesize acute data with long-term functional outcomes. An incomplete narrative can lead to legitimate…

Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels The Scope of Duty under CPR 35.3 In civil litigation within England and Wales, the role of a consultant neurologist acting as an expert witness is governed by the overriding duty to the court, which takes precedence over any obligation to the party instructing the expert. A critical, yet…

Photo by EVG Kowalievska via Pexels The challenge of causation in stroke litigation In neurology medico-legal practice, stroke negligence causation analysis frequently encounters the hurdle of pre-existing arterial risk factors. When a claimant presents with established hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, or atrial fibrillation, the task of isolating the specific impact of a delayed clinical intervention requires a…

Photo by cottonbro studio via Pexels The Clinical Challenge of ‘Normal’ Imaging In neurology medico-legal practice, the absence of radiological abnormalities on conventional CT or standard 1.5T/3T MRI does not exclude the presence of diffuse axonal injury (DAI). DAI represents a spectrum of traumatic brain injury resulting from rotational or shearing forces, causing microscopic disruption…

Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels Neurological Assessment of Seizure Onset In neurology medico-legal practice, establishing causation in epilepsy claims following traumatic brain injury (TBI) requires distinguishing between post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE), where seizures arise as a consequence of brain injury, and the manifestation of pre-existing, idiopathic, or cryptogenic epilepsy. Solicitors and counsel require neurological analysis…

Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels In clinical negligence litigation, the challenge of assessing the adequacy of a neurological assessment is often compounded by hindsight bias. When a clinician reviews records after an adverse outcome—such as an unrecognised stroke or delayed intervention in traumatic brain injury—knowledge of the result may exert a subconscious influence on…

Photo by cottonbro studio via Pexels The Clinical and Evidential Challenge In personal injury litigation, the validation of post-concussive syndrome (PCS) frequently presents a complex hurdle for instructing solicitors and medical experts. Because the clinical presentation relies significantly on self-reported symptoms—such as headache, fatigue, dizziness, and cognitive disturbance—the absence of objective neurological markers on standard…

Photo by cottonbro studio via Pexels The Medico-Legal Challenge of Nerve Injury Attribution In neurology medico-legal practice, determining whether a peripheral nerve deficit arose from a specific operative event or the natural history of an underlying disease is a fundamental requirement for assessing breach of duty and causation. This distinction is rarely binary, often requiring…

Photo by Anna Shvets via Pexels In clinical negligence litigation involving stroke, establishing the nexus between a delay in presentation, diagnosis or intervention and the resulting neurological outcome is the central challenge. For instructing solicitors and experts, the objective is to disentangle the natural progression of the ischaemic event from any incremental morbidity attributable to…