Kent v Griffiths [2000]

Facts

  •  The claimant had an ambulance called upon suffering an athsma attack
  • The ambulance did not arrive for 40 minutes, by which time the claimant had suffered respiratory arrest

Issue

  •  Was the ambulance service liable for being unjustifiably slow in responding

Decision

  •  Yes, claim allowed

Reasoning

  • Despite conflicting priorities, it was foreseeable that unjustified delay would foreseeably suffer further injury following the acceptance of responsibility by the service
  • If justification had occurred in good time, the claimant could have been driven to hospital
RELATED CASE  Z v UK [2002]

Posted in Tort Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 6th January 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy