Harpreet has over 8 years post qualification experience as a defendant clinical negligence practitioner having worked in top tier law firms.

She is based in the London healthcare team and specialises in healthcare litigation, in particular, clinical negligence claims on behalf of NHS trusts and GPs.

Harpreet has acted in a wide variety of clinical negligence cases including general surgical, orthopaedic, neurosurgical, birth injury, brain injury, gynaecological, fatal and delayed diagnosis of cancer claims. Her caseload includes high value (multi-million pound) claims which are medically complex as well as sensitive in nature. Harpreet has developed an interest in cauda equina claims and successfully defended a CE claim at trial.

Harpreet has achieved a number of successful settlements of complex, high value claims on behalf of clients (with significant discounts and considerable costs savings for her clients) as well as securing discontinuance on a number of claims (pre and post issue of proceedings). She goes the extra mile for her clients in order to achieve the best outcome and early resolution where possible. Clients, experts and Counsel praise Harpreet for her good judgment and strategy with resolving and defending claims. 

Harpreet has had previous experience of working in the healthcare regulatory field mainly investigating and preparing for hearings in respect of fitness to practise cases against doctors and nurses. She understands the pressures facing the medical profession today. She has also undertaken secondments with NHS Resolution.

Harpreet has had trial successes in orthopaedic claims and successfully obtained  a wasted costs order (see below for further detail). 

Notable cases:

• Anne Edith Powell v University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 736 (KB) – successfully defended the Trust in an orthopaedic knee infection clinical negligence claim relating to consenting of treatment. The Claimant alleged that had she been advised of the risks and limitations of the procedures offered by her treating Orthopaedic Surgeon, and if she was advised of a reasonable alternative i.e. to remove the implant, then she would have taken this option, and that would have eradicated any infection and would have avoided the amputation of her left leg. The Defendant Trust admitted that it had not discussed all the alternative options with the Claimant and therefore was a breach of duty. However, the Court found in favour of the Defendant Trust and that the Claimant did not establish that she would have undergone removal of the implant if presented with this option and that she would have accepted the treating Orthopaedic Surgeon’s advice in any event. The Court also found that the infection alleged to have been present prior to 28.01.14, was not present prior to then and ultimately the breach of duty did not lead to the amputation of the Claimant’s left leg. Causation was not established.

The full judgement can be read here: Anne Edith Powell v University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust.pdf (hempsons.co.uk)

• Sarah Jarman v University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 323 (QB) – successfully defended the Defendant Trust in an alleged delay in diagnosing and treating cauda equina syndrome (spinal injury), which was valued in excess of £2.5 million, in circumstances where the Claimant was given permission to not only rely on her own expert evidence but also the evidence of experts instructed by the PI Defendant (the Claimant’s employer), in separate, but related proceedings, who also brought a Part 20 contribution claim against the Defendant Trust but was discontinued prior to Trial.  The Court rejected the Claimant’s case  on both breach of duty and causation. The Court found that the Defendant had acted in accordance with a reasonable and responsible body of opinion, and was not negligent for failing to diagnose the Claimant as having suspected CES and referring her for an emergency MRI scan in March 2015.

The full judgement can be read here: Jarman v Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 323 (QB) (18 February 2021) (bailii.org)

• Joy Willmott v Royal Berkshire NHS Trust [2019]
• Joy Willmott v Royal Berkshire NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 1196 (QB)– Appeal

Successfully obtained a wasted costs order against the Claimant’s legal representatives for pursuing a clinical negligence claim without the appropriate expert evidence on breach of duty.

The Claimant pursued the Defendant Trust and Defendant GP (represented by separate legal representatives) alleging delays in investigating and diagnosing cancer. The Defendant Trust maintained denial of liability, however, it became apparent the Claimant did not have the requisite expert evidence to support breach of duty. The Claimant discontinued its claim against the Defendant Trust prior to exchange of expert evidence. The Defendant Trust made an application to set aside the notice of discontinuance and strike out the claim as well as pursuing the Claimant’s solicitors for a wasted costs order. In 2019, the Court did not find for the Defendant Trust in respect of setting aside the Notice of Discontinuance, but did award wasted costs against the Claimant’s solicitors. However, the costs assessed was incorrect and the Defendant Trust sought an amendment of the Order under the CPR slip rule, which was approved by the Court in March 2020. The Claimant’s solicitors subsequently sought to appeal the wasted costs order and seek relief from sanction for delay in filing the appeal. Mr Justice Jay refused the Claimant’s appeal and applications.

The appeal judgment can be read here  Joy Wilmott v Royal Berkshire Nhs Foundation Trust.pdf

Main areas of expertise

• healthcare litigation
• clinical negligence
• cauda equina claims

Range of clients

• NHS Resolution
• NHS trusts

Qualifications

2002: LLB (Hons)
2004: LPC