Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtQueen's Bench Division
Judgment Date1957
Year1957
Date1957

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
927 cases
  • Foo Fio Na v Dr Soo Fook Mun
    • Malaysia
    • Federal Court (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • Mohammed Adil v General Medical Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 2 November 2023
    ... ... tribunal (‘the Tribunal’), which is a committee" of the respondent, the General Medical Council (‘the GMC\xE2\x80" ... consultant colorectal surgeon at the Chesterfield Hospital in November 2019. The Tribunal concluded that three of ... standard to be applied should be lower than that in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1975] 1 WLR 583 ... ...
  • (1) The "Wembridge Claimants" and Others v (1) Martin Paul Winter* (First Defendant) (2) East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service and Another (Second Defendant) Austin
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 30 July 2013
    ...be high and/or such that it incorporates the Bolam test in a reference to the well-known test for clinical negligence in Bolam -v- Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582". 7 In addition to the issues of pure law, there are important issues of application of the law to the fac......
  • Barrett v Enfield London Borough Council
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 17 June 1999
    ...the child's educational needs and the authority would be vicariously liable if they were in breach, though the test in Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 W.L.R. 582 would apply to them. These were matters which needed to be 58In the Hampshire case, it was held that the ......
  • Get Started for Free
11 firm's commentaries
49 books & journal articles
  • Government liability in negligence.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 32 No. 1, April 2008
    • 1 April 2008
    ...Act 2007 (UK) c 19, s 1(4)(b). (261) See Australian Retailers Association v Reserve Bank of Australia (2005) 148 FCR 446. (262) [1957] 2 All ER 118. (263) See, eg, Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s (264) Ipp Report, above n 8, 151. (265) Harlow would deny the need for hindsight: see Carol Ha......
  • MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE AND PATIENT AUTONOMY
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2015, December 2015
    • 1 December 2015
    ...The UK, in a recent landmark decision, departed from its earlier jurisprudence applying Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee[1957] 1 WLR 582 to the duty to inform. However, Singapore continues to apply the Bolam test. This article argues that in light of the recent UK decision rejec......
  • THE PROTECTION OF PERSONAL INTERESTS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2015, December 2015
    • 1 December 2015
    ...the law on the disclosure of medical risks in the UK was, at least in theory, governed by Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee[1957] 1 WLR 582 and the majority decision in Sidaway, under which the question of whether a doctor ought to have disclosed a risk is to be determined by wha......
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 12-4, November 2008
    • 1 November 2008
    ...Public Redacted Version,10 July2006 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Bolam v Friern Hospital ManagementCommittee [1957]1 WLR 582,QB . . . 103, 111Bourjaily vUnited States 483US 171 . . . . . . .284Boyle v Wiseman (1855) 10 Ex 647, 156 ER 598. . . . . . . . . . . . . .......
  • Get Started for Free