Mitchell v Leigh Day: Clinical Negligence Expert Witness Insights into a £26M Claim Lost to Delay

Apex Experts
May 13
2 min read

Empty courtroom with wooden benches and judge's bench — An empty courtroom where missed deadlines and procedural failures can determine the outcome of high-stakes clinical negligence litigation.

Introduction

The High Court has recently ruled in Mitchell v Leigh Day [2025] EWHC 1081 (KB), a significant professional negligence claim arising from the mishandling of a high-value clinical negligence case. The decision has caught the attention of the legal-medical community due to its striking reminder of how procedural missteps can have catastrophic consequences.

Background of the Case

The claimant, Dorne Mitchell, instructed Leigh Day in June 2013 to bring a wrongful birth claim against UAE-based healthcare providers. The claim concerned alleged failures in antenatal care which, had they been avoided, may have prevented her daughter’s disability.

Valued at approximately £26 million, the original clinical negligence claim was high-risk, high-reward—and required careful navigation through cross-border litigation and jurisdictional intricacies.

Chronology of Events

2013–2015: Instructions and investigation commenced.
July 2015: Claim Form issued in England and a 17-month extension for service obtained (to Dec 2016).
2016: A series of delays unfolded:
- 9 months to instruct a medical expert.
- 5 months to submit documents for overseas service.
- 12 months before document legalisation at the UAE Embassy.
October 2016: Application for second extension filed.
Feb–Apr 2017: Claim Form served—after the first deadline expired.
2017–2019: The defendants successfully applied to set aside the extension; claim ultimately struck out by the Court of Appeal.

Hospital room with bed, monitor, and privacy curtain in a modern medical facility. — A modern hospital room — the clinical setting central to many high-value negligence claims involving antenatal and inpatient care.

Professional Negligence Claim

In 2023, Ms Mitchell brought a claim against Leigh Day, alleging negligence in handling service of the claim, resulting in loss of chance to pursue the clinical negligence action.

Key allegations include:

Breach of duty for failing to serve on time.
Delay in expert instruction and document processing.
Failure to recognise the strict interpretation of service deadlines by the courts.

This case underscores the importance of adhering to the Civil Procedure Rules – Part 6, which govern the service of documents, including Practice Direction 6B concerning service out of the jurisdiction.

Where the Case Stands Now

April 2024: A split trial was ordered.
May 2025: Master Stevens refused the defendant’s attempt to strike out the claim.
October 2025: A 10-day trial will determine limitation and applicable law issues.

This case hinges not only on liability but also on causation and quantum—how likely was the claimant to succeed in the original claim, and what is the value of the opportunity lost?

Black and gray stethoscope placed on a white medical surface. — A stethoscope — the enduring symbol of clinical expertise at the heart of expert witness testimony in medical negligence cases.

Why This Matters: The Critical Role of Clinical Negligence Expert Witnesses in High-Value Claims

This case is a stark lesson for clinical negligence lawyers and expert witnesses alike.

It underscores the importance of meticulous case management, especially in cross-border contexts. Delays—even administrative—can extinguish access to justice.

At Apex Experts, we are committed to supporting solicitors and nurse experts to ensure deadlines are met, documentation is streamlined, and professional standards are upheld throughout medico-legal proceedings.

Need Support on a Complex Instruction?

Apex Experts works with a panel of highly experienced expert witnesses across the UK and internationally.