McCaul v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHC Foundation Trust [2022] EWHC 1963 (QB) (28 July 2022)

On 28 June 2017, C underwent an operation… to increase the hitherto restricted blood flow to her right leg. It was carried out by… a consultant vascular surgeon. Unhappily, the outcome was very poor. The leg did not thrive. On 4 July, a below knee amputation (“BKA”) was performed. Even this procedure proved to be insufficient. Finally, on 17 July, an above the knee amputation (“AKA”) was carried out. [1]

C’s case… alleged a number of shortcomings in the management of her treatment leading up to the operation of 28 June. However, all of these were abandoned shortly before the trial. The only remaining criticism relates to… performance of the operation of 28 June. Had this procedure been carried out with reasonable care then, although the BKA would still have been required, it is alleged that the later AKA would not have been necessary. [2]

negligence has not been made out and that the claim must fail. [33]