EWJ June 2024 web - Journal - Page 53
Seven-Figure Settlement for
Client who Sustained Serious
Spinal Cord Injury due to
Insufficient Fusion During
Surgery Following Infection
Our client TT underwent spinal surgery at a city
hospital in the Midlands in 2016. They brought
a medical negligence claim for treatment of an
infection of a disc in their spine (septic discitis) at
level T7/8 and the subsequent care they received.
At the date of their catastrophic injuries, TT was
51 years of age and worked as a teaching and
learning assistant in a primary school for children
with behavioural difficulties.
Head of Clinical Negligence Leeds Frank Pinch and
senior paralegal Beth Brayshaw outline TT’s case.
The claim
TT instructed Stewarts’ Frank Pinch at Stewarts and
William Latimer-Sayer KC of Cloisters as barrister.
Post-operatively, TT experienced a significant
deterioration in their condition. The decline in TT’s
neurological function was wrongly attributed to a
spinal infarction/stroke, which is an unexplained loss
of blood supply to the arteries that supply the spinal
cord. However, Stewarts argued that the neurological
deterioration was due to a further collapse of the vertebra, causing cord compression as a result of a failure to fuse the spine sufficiently during the surgery.
TT has a complex presentation with overlapping
psychological problems since their spinal cord injury,
including depression, anxiety, fear of walking/falling
and incontinence.
They have a neuropathic bladder and have lost
bladder control. They also have a neurogenic bowel,
again with loss of control.
The defendant vigorously opposed the claim,
regularly raising procedural and evidential points.
Unusually, witness statements were exchanged by the
defendant from nine clinicians, mainly spinal surgeons, along with anaesthetists and others. Those
statements contained very determined reasons for
disagreeing with TT’s case. The expert evidence was
also highly technical, and many hurdles had to be
overcome.
The constant nature of their symptoms and the
intensity of the neuropathic pain and spasms impact
all TT’s physical and functional abilities. They require
virtually 24-hour care, supervision and support for all
their daily activities, which will continue for the
remainder of their life.
Settlement
A round table meeting in October 2021, two weeks
before a trial to decide liability, resulted in a settlement
where the defendant agreed to pay 65% of the ultimate value of the claim. This was an excellent outcome given the risks of proceeding to a trial and TT
losing and receiving nothing.
Injury
TT was classified as a T6 ASIA D incomplete
paraplegic on discharge from a regional spinal injuries
centre in 2016.
TT can only walk short distances indoors and
outdoors. Until the gradual introduction of purchased
care from November 2022, they were reliant on their
spouse for support and supervision for all their day-today activities and needs.
The value of TT’s claim was subsequently settled at
a further round table meeting. The defendant
agreed to pay a lump sum of £2.2m and significant
periodical payments annually for future care and
case management for the rest of TT’s life.
They also have ongoing significant neuropathic and
musculoskeletal pain.
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
51
JUNE 2024