Expert witnesses will know, at least in general terms, the legal test for adequate consent to treatment has
moved to that of the ‘prudent patient’ or ‘Montgomery’ test, following the Supreme Court case of
Montgomery v Lanarkshire (2015). The test for treatment itself
remains the reasonable body or Bolam Test following Bolam v Friern
Hospital Management Committee (1957).
Many practitioners are anxious as to what this splitting of the legal standard of care for consent means for
expert witnesses when assessing the acts or omissions of health professionals who deliver care to patients: what
does it mean for the quality of information patients now ought to expect to receive when they consent to
- When should patients have been warned – and how?
- Was a failure to mention a 2% risk of paralysis negligent?
- What can be said about causation?
- What can the expert say about their own practice and experience?
This online course considers what is sometimes called ‘informed consent’ into UK healthcare practice, and what
it means for expert witnesses considering what information provision to patients should have occurred from a
medico-legal perspective. The course provides 5 hours of CPD.
It is a course intended for experts but will be of interest to all practitioners – whether they intend to work
as an expert witness or simply build their wider knowledge and awareness. It is right up to date with 2019 and
2020 case law applying the tests, as well as expert guidance.
The course presenters are Jonathan Dingle FRSA, Andrea Barnes, and Zoey White, all leading barristers from
Click here to view
the full Consent Course programme.
COURSE DATES: 2021 and 2022
Click Link To Book
8th Jul 2021
Consent in Medico-Legal Cases