Top ranked cerebral palsy claims lawyers
£1.3 million secured for 14 year old dyskinetic cerebral palsy sufferer
Malcolm* suffered a brain injury at birth following negligent delays in delivering him, which meant that there was a lack of oxygen to his brain. As a result Malcolm suffers from asymmetric moderate dyskinetic cerebral palsy and he requires assistance with some activities of daily living.
Following a detailed review of Malcolm’s special needs in the past, at the time and in the future, our specialist cerebral palsy claims solicitors obtained a £1.325m settlement for birth injury negligence for Malcolm and his family.
The claims process
When Malcolm’s family contacted our birth injury negligence team we started to look at the circumstances of his birth and how the hypoxic ischemic injury that gave rise to his cerebral palsy could have been prevented.
This involved looking at the medical records of both Malcolm and his mum, and getting views and opinions from a range of medical experts. We wanted to establish that the lack of oxygen in the lead up to delivery caused the cerebral palsy.
Our specialist cerebral palsy claims solicitors contacted the hospital setting out what happened to Malcolm and how we believed the birth injury negligence had caused his brain injury. The hospital admitted that birth injury negligence had occurred, and, if proper medical care had been provided to Malcolm then his brain injury would have been avoided and his cerebral palsy claim would not have been necessary.
Following the hospital’s admission a formal judgment order was made against the hospital. Our specialist cerebral palsy solicitors then quantified Malcolm’s claim, which involved instructing experts to advise on issues such as accommodation and care. Following negotiations with the hospital’s solicitors a £1.325m settlement for birth injury negligence was agreed.
Did the Hospital admit fault?
Yes, the hospital admitted that the delay in delivering Malcolm resulted in his cerebral palsy.
The future for Malcolm
The compensation received by Malcolm for his cerebral palsy claim has meant that his family have been able to look at adapting their property so it is more suitable for Malcolm’s special needs arising from his cerebral palsy. His birth injury negligence compensation will also pay for the help Malcolm needs in the future, when his physical condition may deteriorate.
*All names have been changed for client privacy.
I try to assist lawyers by explaining, in clear and comprehensible terms, what the relevant issues are and where the strengths and weaknesses of the case lie.
DR PETER DEAR