Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428

Facts

  • A night watchman attended the Accident and Emergency department of Chelsea and Kensington Hospital with severe stomach pain and vomiting.
  • The watchman was not examined by a doctor; instead, he was advised by the medical staff to consult his general practitioner.
  • The watchman died a few hours later from arsenic poisoning.
  • It was established that the hospital failed to properly examine the patient, which constituted a breach of their duty of care.
  • Medical evidence indicated that, even with prompt examination and treatment, the outcome—death due to advanced arsenic poisoning—would not have changed.

Issues

  1. Whether the hospital owed a duty of care to the patient and breached this duty by failing to examine him.
  2. Whether the breach of duty by the hospital caused the patient’s death, applying the 'but for' test of factual causation.
  3. Whether the harm suffered was legally too remote or unforeseeable as a consequence of the breach.

Decision

  • The court found that the hospital owed a duty of care and breached this duty by not examining the patient.
  • Despite this breach, the court held that the hospital's negligence did not cause the patient’s death because, according to medical evidence, the patient would have died regardless of medical intervention at that stage.
  • The 'but for' test of causation was not satisfied, as the death was not preventable even had proper care been given.
  • As causation was lacking, the hospital was found not liable for the patient's death.

Legal Principles

  • Establishing negligence requires proving duty of care, breach of that duty, and causation between the breach and the harm.
  • The 'but for' test is central to factual causation: if the harm would have occurred regardless of the breach, causation is not established.
  • Legal causation assesses whether the harm is too remote; however, if factual causation fails, legal causation need not be considered.
  • Medical negligence claims require clear evidence that the defendant’s breach caused the harm suffered.

Conclusion

The court confirmed that a breach of duty alone does not incur liability unless it is shown, on the balance of probabilities, that the harm would not have occurred but for the breach; in this case, the hospital was not liable as its negligent omission did not cause the patient's death.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal