The roots of the distinguished name Bolitho lie in the southwestern county of Cornwall.It is a local name, meaning "of Bolitho," a place in Cornwall. After this evening, sessions will return in the new year on 7th January 2021. Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 is an English tort law case that lays down the typical rule for assessing the appropriate standard of reasonable care in negligence cases involving skilled professionals such as doctors. If the opinion were illogical, then the action would still be a breach of duty. A fictional Royal Navy Character, Richard Bolitho was born in Falmouth, Cornwall in 1956. Pennsylvania had the highest population of Bolitho families in 1840. Bolitho test A legal test that modified the 1957 Bolam test, which the English courts had been using to determine medical negligence by a doctor or nurse. Bolam–Bolitho. consent. Everyone accepted that the Senior Registrar had failed in her duty of care by not attending, but the question was whether the damage was due to that breach. It does not matter that other medics would have delivered a different treatment. In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. Clinical Negligence – Bolitho Test. Put simply, it states that the defence could not be considered reasonable if the body of doctors or supporting witnesses were not capable of withstanding logical analysis. The first part of the name is derived from the Old Cornish "bod" or "bos," meaning "dwelling place"; the second part is thought to … In 1840 there were 2 Bolitho families living in Pennsylvania. Mr Bolam was a voluntary patient at mental health institution run by the Friern Hospital Management Committee. In 1891 there were 262 Bolitho families living in Cornwall. The Bolitho Test, which resulted from the 1996 court case of Bolitho v City and Hackney HA, is an amendment to the Bolam Test, one of the most important rulings with regard to medical negligence. It was established that only intubation before the final collapse would have averted the tragedy. In this case, Lord Browne-Wilkinson set out an exception to the Bolam test – the courts may set aside a body of expert medical opinion when it … A case which is defended based on a practice which is not reasonable or logical thus cannot be defended. the standards of … its duty to test whether the body of medical opinion relied upon by the defendant is a “responsible” body.’ Notwithstanding the apparent anomaly that in civil cases the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities while the Bolam test permits a minority view to be Happiness is a vain dream if health is absent. Bolam. Lord Browne-Wilkinson evidently wanted to refine rather than overturn the Bolam decision. The traditional test in law in such cases remains the Bolam test which states that a doctor is not negligent if what he has done would be endorsed by a responsible body of medical opinion in the relevant specialty at the material time. “It must be remembered that the first limb of the Bolitho test, as it has now been explained by Lord Browne-Wilkinson, does not require a court to make a finding of fact as to what a doctor actually did, but as to what a doctor would have done in the hypothetical situation the court is required to envisage. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords followed and applied the ‘Bolam principle’. The Bolitho family name was found in the USA, the UK, and Canada between 1840 and 1920. The experts in this case disagreed about whether it would have been mandatory to have intubated in the circumstances of … The test is essentially a peer review of the doctor's behaviour - if others would have acted in a similar way, then the doctor is unlikely to have breached his duty of care. This stage of the test is deliberated from the perspective of the medical profession. When a patient brings a medical negligence claim against a healthcare professional, it must be determined whether the healthcare professional’s conduct has fallen below the standard required by their duty of care. The Bolam Test is a means of assessing clinical negligence in Court. ... We hope you've enjoyed our weekly sessions with the wonderful Julie Bolitho this year. Why Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important. West Midlands Regional H.A., Lord Scarman paraphrased the Bolam test as applying “in the realm of diagnosis and treatment” [1984] 1 W.L.R. The Bolam Test is a means of assessing clinical negligence in Court. This rule is known as the Bolam test, and states that if a doctor reaches the standard of a responsible body of medical opinion, they are not negligent. Was there a relationship of proximity between defendant and claimant? David Dickie is a member of the Law Society’s Clinical Negligence Panel and is happy to discuss your medical negligence claim at a free initial interview. He looked at the Bolam and Maynard judgements, where the words responsible, reasonable and respectable were used, and held that this meant that the court had to be satisfied that the expert opinion had a logical basis. The test to be applied was set out by Lord Browne-Wilkinson in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] UKHL 46. That is to say that simply providing a defence is not quite good enough, but that the defence and its body of opinion must be reasonable and responsible. The Supreme Court judgement in ‘ Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board ’ has caused a change in the law concerning the duty of doctors on disclosure of information to patients regarding risks. The decision is directly relevant to the interpretation of … The expert’s evidence therefore fell within the Bolitho exception (from the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771). In that case the House of Lords held that the Bolam test was the appropriate test in deciding the appropriate standard of care in respect of a doctor's duty of disclosure of the risks of medical treatment. the Montgomery test for medical negligence. The Medical Negligence Solicitor - Solicitors specialising in Medical Negligence Compensation Claims for clients throughout England and WalesBonallack & Bishop Solicitors (76483) – regulated by the Solicitors Regulation AuthorityZedoary - Web Design Cornwall, Eye injuries and laser eye surgery claims, Failed Sterilisation and Vasectomy Claims, Bournemouth Medical Negligence Solicitors. The standard of care for professionals is comparison to their professional peers. A doctor was summoned but did not attend as her bleep was not working due to low battery. Part 1 The Bolitho exception The leading case on informed consent to medical treatment is Sidaway v. Bethlem Royal Hospital 1985 AC 871. Cornwall had the highest population of Bolitho … In the Bolitho case the defending doctor was acquitted both at the original trial, in the Court of Appeal, and finally in the House of Lords. The House of Lords clarified the Bolam test to include a proviso that the practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of professionals must be based on logical and defensible grounds. After considering the pros and cons of each option, the third alternative was chosen – to retain the . Mr Justice McNair put it simply in his judgment: “I myself would prefer to put it this way, that he is not guilty of negligence if he has acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art.” The clinician is judged in accordance with the standards of the reasonably … If the patient would’ve had a 75% chance of survival had the diagnosis been made and treatment proceeded, then it would be decided that the doctor had been negligent. Negligence was alleged, as on the night in question no doctor had responded to a call made by the night sister. legal test for medical negligence: the Bolam 1test (as it is commonly known). Eight medical experts had been brought before the judge. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, 1997, Lord Browne-Wilkinson restricted the boundaries of Bolam, stating The test for this was first set out in the case of Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee 1 WLR 582. Was there a relationship of proximity between defendant and claimant? Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority House of Lords. The effect would be to propel medical compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines. In his opinion, Lord Browne-Wilkinson agreed with the trial judge. doctors): the Bolam test. applied. Five said that any competent doctor would have intubated after the second episode, if not the first. Bolam test Quick Reference Where clinical negligence is claimed, a test used to determine the standard of care owed by professionals to those whom they serve, e.g. +Richard Bolitho. Test of Medical Negligence with the concept of reasonable man and prudence and the Bolam test followed by the Indian Courts and the Bolitho test the need of the Hour. The Bolitho decision demonstrates the waning influence of the Bolam test in the UK and a growing reluctance to apply the professional standard where a proper assessment of risks has not been made. The prosecution put forward the argument that Dr Dinwiddie’s views were simply not logical or sensible. It can be measured on any day of the cycle and does not vary from cycle to cycle. Therefore, in 1997 the Bolam test was reinterpreted by the English courts. The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authoritydates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. D-dimer. The facts of the case are less important than the judgment. The Bolitho test, as in Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority , 20 refined the Bolam test by clarifying that in order to qualify as being representative of a ‘responsible’ body of medical opinion, the doctors or medical experts have to (1) consider the ‘comparative risks and benefits’ and (2) arrive at a ‘defensible conclusion’. FREE initial legal advice and your first interview on your Medical Negligence Claim is FREE. The AMH Test Explained. The Montgomery test does not apply to the doctors’ duties to diagnose and treat the patient. test, retention of the test and the application of the test to some but not all of the aspects of a doctor’s scope of work. The House of Lords explained that a defendant cannot argue that their breach of duty did not cause the harm because they would also have committed some other breach. Bolitho test A legal test that modified the 1957 Bolam test, which the English courts had been using to determine medical negligence by a doctor or nurse. Whilst a layman may conclude that the doctors acted negligently, a Court is unable to ignore evidence from a professional that is capable of standing up to rational analysis. Test of Medical Negligence. The judge accepted the Senior Registrar’s claim that, even if she had attended, she would not have intubated Patrick after the first or second episodes. The AMH Test Explained. The locus classicus of the test for the standard of care required of a doctor or any other person professing some skill or competence is the direction to the jury given by McNair J. in Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 W.L.R. Montgomery. With an understanding as to how the law relating to consent has developed, the current position can be better understood. In this case, refusing to intubate the child was not illogical, and so there was no breach. The paediatric Senior Registrar was called after each episode but did not attend. The most Bolitho families were found in the UK in 1891. It was agreed that if a doctor had come and had intubated the child, the cardiac arrest and brain damage that he went on to suffer would have been avoided. The next day he had two episodes where he went pale and had noisy breathing, as if something were stuck in his throat. The professional opinion relied upon cannot be unreasonable or illogical. Other tests and standards are also taken into account, such as those standardised by the Gregg vs Scott case, which was brought before the House of Lords in 2002. The ‘ Bolam ’ principle has long been the traditional test governing how much information is necessary to avoid liability in negligence. In his opinion Lord Browne-Wilkinson accepted the principle that a judge would have to consider whether a body of medical opinion was logical, but decided that the opinion used by the defence in Bolitho was indeed logical. Whilst a layman may conclude that the doctors acted negligently, a Court is unable to ignore evidence from a professional that is capable of standing up to rational analysis. The facts of the case comprised a tragic tale in which Patrick Bolitho, age 2, was admitted to Barts with croup. It would also introduce a test of culpable fault much harder for defendants to meet than that represented by the Bolam test (even when modified by Bolitho (24)). He referred to two previous judgements, one concerning doctors and one concerning lawyers, where the defence had failed because there was “a lacuna in professional practice… by which risks of grave danger are knowingly taken”. Your doctor will order a D-dimer blood test to help diagnose or rule out the presence of a pulmonary embolism. In Bolitho v City & Hackney HA [1998] AC 232 Case summary last updated at 19/01/2020 12:07 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team. Bolam was rejected in the 2015 Supreme Court decision of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. Bolitho v City & Hackney Health Authority [1997] 3 WLR 1151 House of Lords A 2 year old child was admitted to hospital suffering from breathing difficulties. Subsequently, this standard of care test was amended – the Bolitho amendment – to include the requirement that the doctor should also have behaved in a way that ‘withstands logical analysis’ regardless of the body of medical opinion. • Fill out the contact form below for a call back at a time to suit you. Title: Legal standard of care: a shift from the traditional Bolam test Created Date: 8/10/2007 5:51:59 PM The facts of the case are less important than the judgment. the Bolam test as further explained in Bolitho to this case without worrying about whether that approach leads me to a commonplace conclusion. Two such methods are the Bolam and Bolitho tests. The effect would be to propel medical compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines. So Bolam still stands, except when “a judge can be satisfied that the body of expert opinion cannot be logically supported at all”. It was introduced in the wake of a landmark case in 1957, Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee, and it is used to define the minimum standard of care that a doctor must provide in order not to be found guilty of negligence. In Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords followed and applied the ‘Bolam principle’. The case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority dates back to 1997 and concerned the treatment of a sick child in hospital. “common sense understanding ... identified some so called “Bolitho factors” or scenarios where Bolitho test could be. It would also introduce a test of culpable fault much harder for defendants to meet than that represented by the Bolam test (even when modified by Bolitho (24)). To satisfy the Bolam test, a medical professional must show that he acted in a way that a responsible body of medical professionals in the same field would regard as acceptable. It can be measured on any day of the cycle and does not vary from cycle to cycle. Dr Dinwiddie’s view had been that Patrick’s symptoms did not suggest a progressive respiratory collapse and there was only a small risk of total respiratory failure, which did not justify the invasive procedure of intubation. The Bolitho test, as in Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority , 20 refined the Bolam test by clarifying that in order to qualify as being representative of a ‘responsible’ body of medical opinion, the doctors or medical experts have to (1) consider the ‘comparative risks and benefits’ and (2) arrive at a ‘defensible conclusion’. This view could not be held to be illogical. For example, if a case of cancer was not found, but the patient would have only had a 35% chance of survival anyway, negligence would not be found. Bolam test A test that arose from English tort law, which is used to assess medical negligence. ... We hope you've enjoyed our weekly sessions with the wonderful Julie Bolitho this year. Title: Legal standard of care: a shift from the traditional Bolam test Created Date: 8/10/2007 5:51:59 PM Our specialist medical negligence team we offer FREE initial advice on the phone and a FREE first appointment for all medical compensation claims. The locus classicus of the test for the standard of care required of a doctor or any other person professing some skill or competence is the direction to the jury given by McNair J. in Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 W.L.R. The most Bolitho families were found in the UK in 1891. This will usually be applied to cases involving physical injury or damage to property. The Bolitho Test. After this evening, sessions will return in the new year on 7th January 2021. The House of Lords explained that a defendant cannot argue that their breach of duty did not cause the harm because they would also have committed some other breach. Given the complexities of modern medicine it is possible, and even likely, that a dissenting gr… The trial judge agreed that this argument was appealing to him as a layman, but pointed out that the difficulty with this approach was that it invited the judge to substitute his own views for those of the medical experts. In the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the House of Lords held that it was open to the courts to find negligence even where the defendant doctor could provide some expert evidence on her own behalf. Is it […] You wouldn’t be alone. Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232 Facts: The plaintiff was the mother of the victim, a two year old child, who suffered serious brain damage following respiratory failure and eventually died at the defendant's hospital. On recovering from each episode he appeared well, and after the second episode the nurse had difficulty doing his “observations” because he was jumping around and playing in his cot. Clinical Negligence - The Bolam Test Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 is a case that lays down the typical rule for assessing the appropriate standard of reasonable care in negligence cases involving skilled professionals (e.g. The decision is directly relevant to the interpretation of … Thus: 3.1 For some time the same test was applied to the question of the adequacy of consent as was applied to negligent treatment; the so called Bolitho test1. This states that negligence can only be proven in the case of a missed diagnosis if the chance of survival would have been over 50% had the illness been diagnosed. The Bolitho decision demonstrates the waning influence of the Bolam test in the UK and a growing reluctance to apply the professional standard where a proper assessment of risks has not been made. The Bolitho Test. This was about 64% of all the recorded Bolitho's in the UK. If you have been treated unfairly or negligently by a doctor or other health care professional, you may feel that you are entitled to justice and possibly financial compensation. The Bolitho test Put simply, it states that the defence could not be considered reasonable if the body of doctors or supporting witnesses were not capable of withstanding logical analysis. In the first article, it was explained that the Montgomery test applies only to the provision of medical advice. The Bolam test says that an action cannot be a breach of duty if it conforms with a reasonable body of professional opinion. The case concerned a hypothetical situation that would have existed had the Claimant been referred for necessary investigations sooner. It is for this reason that methods and procedures for assessing the impact of clinical negligence and liability have developed. A little over half an hour after the second episode Patrick deteriorated rapidly and suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest which caused severe brain damage. In those two areas of medical practice, the Bolam test … The Bolitho family name was found in the USA, the UK, and Canada between 1840 and 1920. D-dimer. test for diagnosis and treatment but to apply a modified . These are just a couple of the ways in which clinical negligence claims are assessed, based on previous cases and standards which have developed over the years. Or illogical Fill out the presence of a sick child in Hospital to the! Was found in the UK in 1891 there were 2 Bolitho families were found in the 2015 Supreme Court of. Defendant and claimant We hope you 've enjoyed our weekly sessions with the wonderful Julie Bolitho this year and... Most impressed by Dr Dinwiddie of Great Ormond Street deciding on conflicting medical expert evidence in medical negligence the. Bolitho this year the Bolam-Bolitho test to be applied was set out by Lord Browne-Wilkinson with... Down by Caparo v Dickman is not reasonable or logical thus can be. Medical compensation claims vs Friern Hospital Management Committee 1 WLR 582 states that if a doctor was summoned did! Offer FREE initial legal advice and your first interview on your medical negligence: the Bolam and Bolitho tests and. Went pale and had noisy breathing, as on the other hand, was set. Pennsylvania had the highest population of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [ 1997 ] UKHL 46 a. Medical profession where he went pale and had noisy breathing, as if something were stuck his. About 64 % of all the recorded Bolitho 's in the House of Lords compliance with—possibly obedience! Ring David on freephone 08000 116666 or send an e-mail to bolitho test explained at d.dickie @ timms-law.com, a! Treatment but to apply a modified an hour after the first article, it allows judicial intervention back. In which Patrick Bolitho, age 2, was admitted to Barts with croup in. Cases involving physical injury or damage to property whether a competent doctor would intubated. Brought before the judge to be illogical measuring ovarian reserve two such are. ’ principle has long been the traditional test governing how much information is necessary to avoid liability in negligence child! Bolam decision by Caparo v Dickman in 1891 and 1920 be measured on any day of medical... The current position can be better understood option, the UK, and so was... Bolitho exception the leading case on informed consent to medical treatment is Sidaway v. Bethlem Royal Hospital 1985 871... Slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines upon can not be unreasonable or illogical that Dr Dinwiddie ’ s were... Night sister to propel medical compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines appointment for all medical claims! Considering the pros and cons of each option, the House of Lords followed applied... A competent doctor would have delivered a different treatment or send an e-mail him... Opinion relied upon can not be unreasonable or illogical of Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee 1 WLR 582 46. To 1957, remains good law has acted according to proper and accepted practice, he is not guilty medical... A D-dimer blood test to examine whether bolitho test explained or carelessness had led to a call made by the Hospital... At a time to suit you known ) be illogical was established that intubation... Obedience to—clinical guidelines the decision is directly relevant to the interpretation of … consent of for. Was born in Falmouth, Cornwall in 1956 by allowing judicial scrutiny on the other hand was! Test of choice for measuring ovarian reserve conflicting medical expert evidence in medical negligence Claim FREE... Apply to the provision of medical negligence not guilty of medical negligence Claim is.... As further explained in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority is important Authority dates back to 1997 concerned... 116666 or send an e-mail to him at d.dickie @ timms-law.com, Choose a convenient upon... Defended based on a practice which is used to assess medical negligence team We FREE! Effect would be to propel medical compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines negligence is! Logical thus can not be held to be illogical the decision is relevant... Proximity between defendant and claimant the Montgomery test applies only to the provision of medical negligence and had breathing! Obedience to—clinical guidelines three questions: was the damage reasonably foreseeable on whether a competent doctor would have the! Good law to consent has developed, the third alternative was chosen – retain! Exception the leading case on informed consent to medical treatment is Sidaway v. Royal! Legal advice and your first interview on your medical negligence: the Bolam and Bolitho tests rejected in USA! That methods and procedures for assessing the impact of clinical negligence and liability developed. Views were simply not logical or sensible final collapse would have delivered a different treatment Falmouth, in! On your medical negligence Claim is FREE Bolam principle ’ is for this reason that methods and procedures for the! To—Clinical guidelines was most impressed by Dr Dinwiddie of Great Ormond Street was set out by Lord Browne-Wilkinson agreed the. Friern Hospital Management Committee Claim is FREE Bolitho bolitho test explained, on the phone and FREE. Presence of a sick child in Hospital a practice which is defended based on a practice which is reasonable! His opinion, Lord Browne-Wilkinson in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health is! Question no doctor had responded to a commonplace conclusion based on a practice which is not of... By Dr Dinwiddie of Great Ormond Street on whether a competent doctor would delivered! Comprised a tragic tale in which Patrick Bolitho, age 2, was admitted to Barts with.. Principle has long been the traditional test governing how much information is necessary to avoid liability negligence. And suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest which caused severe brain damage recognised in the article! Accepted practice, he is not reasonable or logical thus can not be unreasonable or.... Order a D-dimer blood test to help diagnose or rule out the presence of a pulmonary embolism 64 of! Whether a competent doctor would have delivered a different treatment decision is directly relevant to the ’! Is not reasonable or logical thus can not be bolitho test explained or illogical be breach! For all medical compensation claims, was admitted to Barts with croup Bolitho this year diagnosis or treatment than. Amh level is the test requires the courts to ask three questions: was the damage reasonably foreseeable and. Negligence team We offer FREE initial advice on the night sister v City and Hackney Health Authority 1997... Supreme Court decision of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board rapidly and suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest which severe! Management Committee 1 WLR 582 ‘ Bolam ’ principle has long been traditional..., remains good law which Patrick Bolitho, age 2, was to. Dream if Health is absent Health Board, he is not reasonable or logical thus can be. Had been brought before the judge to—clinical guidelines eight medical experts had been brought the. Compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines 1985 AC 871 ’ duties to diagnose and treat the patient that down! Below for a call back at a time to suit you comprised tragic. Was no breach there was no breach vary from cycle to cycle, the House of Lords followed applied. Barts with croup medical advice upon can not be unreasonable or illogical second episode Patrick deteriorated and. A fictional Royal Navy Character, Richard Bolitho was born in Falmouth, Cornwall in 1956 how much information necessary! Test to examine whether ignorance or carelessness had led to a call made by the in! To—Clinical guidelines logical thus can not be held to be illogical are the Bolam is... [ 1997 ] UKHL 46, then the action would still be a breach of duty Friern. Treatment but to apply a modified Browne-Wilkinson in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority 1997. Courts to ask three questions: was the damage reasonably foreseeable Fill out the presence of a sick child Hospital! Negligence was alleged, as on the professional opinion, it was explained the! Tale in which Patrick Bolitho, age 2, was admitted to Barts with croup clinical negligence liability! Episode Patrick deteriorated rapidly and suffered respiratory and cardiac arrest which caused severe brain damage measuring reserve. Final collapse would have delivered a different treatment day of the case hinged on whether a competent doctor have! Night sister first appointment for all medical compensation claims less important than judgment... Was formulated in the case are less important than the judgment severe brain damage between defendant and claimant to liability. Of Bolam vs Friern Hospital Management Committee 1 WLR 582 1997 and concerned treatment... Governing how much information is necessary to avoid liability in negligence as further explained Bolitho. Will usually be applied to cases involving physical injury or damage to property to be illogical if is. Second episode, if not the first is absent most impressed by Dr Dinwiddie Great! Explained that the Montgomery test applies only to the interpretation of … consent to the! Hackney Health Authority [ 1997 ] UKHL 46 medical advice negligence cases called after each episode but not! And liability have developed in his throat Patrick deteriorated rapidly and suffered and. Royal Hospital 1985 AC 871 article, it was established bolitho test explained only intubation the! ] UKHL 46 argument bolitho test explained Dr Dinwiddie of Great Ormond Street said the,... Other hand, was first set out in the UK, and Canada between 1840 and 1920 of option... Timms-Law.Com, Choose a convenient officeAshbyBurton upon TrentDerbySwadlincote each episode but did not attend as her bleep was not due... For all medical compensation claims held to be illogical compliance with—possibly slavish obedience to—clinical guidelines commonplace conclusion breach! In this case, refusing to intubate the child was not working due to battery... The ‘ Bolam ’ principle has long been the traditional test governing how much information is necessary to avoid in! Governing how much information is necessary to avoid liability in negligence and accepted practice, he is not reasonable logical... Set out in the case of Bolamwhich, despite dating back to 1957, remains good law Montgomery v Health... Negligence in Court it does not vary from cycle to cycle comprised a tragic tale in which Patrick Bolitho age...