Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee

Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 is a landmark English tort law case that established the Bolam test, a standard for assessing the appropriate standard of care in negligence cases involving professionals, particularly in the field of medicine. The decision has had a profound impact on the development of the law of negligence, especially in regards to medical negligence.

Background

The case involved John Bolam, a patient at Friern Hospital, a mental health institution managed by the Friern Hospital Management Committee. Bolam agreed to undergo electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), a psychiatric treatment method. At the time of the treatment, it was not common practice to use muscle relaxants or to restrain patients, nor was it standard to warn patients of the risks of fracture associated with the treatment. Unfortunately, during the procedure, Bolam sustained serious fractures.

The Case

Bolam brought a claim against the hospital, alleging that the hospital had been negligent in (1) failing to administer muscle relaxants, (2) failing to restrain him during the procedure, and (3) failing to warn him of the risks involved. The case was heard by Mr. Justice McNair.

Judgment

In his judgment, McNair J introduced what became known as the "Bolam test" for assessing professional negligence. He stated that a doctor is not guilty of negligence if they have acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art, even though there is a body of opinion that takes a contrary view. The court found that the hospital had not been negligent in its treatment of Bolam because it had acted in accordance with practices accepted at the time by a body of medical opinion.

Impact

The Bolam test has been influential in shaping the law of negligence, particularly in the context of professional liability. It has been applied not only in medical negligence cases but also in other areas where the assessment of professional standards is required. However, the test has also been subject to criticism for allowing professional groups to set their own standards of care, potentially lowering the level of protection offered to the public.

In subsequent years, the application of the Bolam test has been refined by further case law. Notably, the case of Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1997] introduced an addendum to the Bolam test, stating that the court must also be satisfied that the body of opinion relied upon can demonstrate that it is reasonable and responsible.

See Also

• Medical negligence
• English tort law
• Professional negligence
• Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority