We have previously written about the UK government’s plan to set up designated settings for persons leaving hospital who require a care home but have a diagnosis of COVID-19. This was originally outlined in the Adult Social Care Winter plan released in November, and each local authority was required to put in place plans to set up such facilities. Part of the set up problems was the willingness of the insurance market to provide cover for these settings.
In a written statement this week (18 January 2021), the Vaccines Minister Nadhim Zahawi has confirmed provision of a temporary government backed indemnity to provide cover for clinical negligence, EL and PL cover in the circumstances where a care provider cannot secure sufficient cover, or cover at all via the commercial insurance market. The scheme is intended to run only until the end of March 2021 and, as such, has the feeling of a ‘stop gap’ solution.
The highest court will once again consider the basis and application of the doctrine that no recovery should flow from illegal acts (often cited in Latin as the ex turpi causa rule), something which has been before the Supreme Court on several occasions in recent years in very different factual settings. The latest case involves a claim by a psychiatric patient against an NHS Trust for losses arising from the death of her mother. She had killed her mother while under the Trust’s care and it was agreed this would not have happened but for failings in the care provided to her. Seven Justices will hear the case by video conference in mid-May.
Vicki Swanton’s recent blog towards the end of January took a broad look at a range of factors at work in influencing the increasing cost of clinical negligence claims and outlined some of the initiatives underway to address this. Further data on the rising burden of clinical negligence in England emerged earlier this week in the written Parliamentary answer set out below.