“Hospitals can be directly liable for negligent medical treatment provided within their institutions.”
The claimant underwent hand surgery at a hospital but suffered permanent disability due to negligent post-operative care. The hospital argued it was not liable as doctors were independent contractors, not employees.
Whether a hospital owes a direct duty of care to patients and can be vicariously liable for negligent treatment by medical staff.
The Court of Appeal held the hospital liable, finding both direct liability and vicarious liability for the negligent treatment.
This landmark case transformed medical negligence law by establishing hospitals' direct liability to patients and expanding vicarious liability in healthcare. It recognised the reality of modern medical practice where patients rely on institutional rather than individual professional relationships.
You're reading the free summary of Cassidy v Ministry of Health. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2 KB 343
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.