What is the ratio in Bolam v Friern Hospital?

A professional is not negligent if acting in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of skilled professional opinion, even if other professionals would disagree.

What did the court decide in Bolam v Friern Hospital?

The court held the hospital was not negligent because the treatment followed an accepted medical practice, despite the existence of alternative approaches that might have prevented injury.

Why is Bolam v Friern Hospital important for tort law?

It established the universal test for professional negligence that protects professionals from liability when following accepted practices, balancing patient protection with professional freedom.

What is the ratio in Bolam v Friern Hospital?

A professional is not negligent if acting in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of skilled professional opinion, even if other professionals would disagree.

What did the court decide in Bolam v Friern Hospital?

The court held the hospital was not negligent because the treatment followed an accepted medical practice, despite the existence of alternative approaches that might have prevented injury.

Why is Bolam v Friern Hospital important for tort law?

It established the universal test for professional negligence that protects professionals from liability when following accepted practices, balancing patient protection with professional freedom.

Tort1 min read

Bolam v Friern Hospital

[1957] 1 WLR 582Queen's Bench Division1957

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Tort cases →

“Bolam establishes professional standard test for medical negligence claims”

Facts

The claimant patient underwent electroconvulsive therapy at the defendant hospital without being given relaxant drugs or manual restraint. During the treatment, he suffered fractures. The standard practice among medical professionals was divided on whether relaxant drugs or restraints should be used.

Issues

What is the appropriate test for determining whether a medical professional has breached their duty of care to a patient?

Held

A medical professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical practitioners skilled in that particular area.

Significance

The Bolam test became the foundational standard for professional negligence claims across all professions, not just medicine. It remained the dominant test until modified by Bolitho v City and Hackney HA in 1997.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Bolam v Friern Hospital. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 (QB)

Medical NegligenceProfessional NegligenceTort Law

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDLSQE1

More Tort cases

Jaqueline Casey & Ors v Environment Agency

[2026] EWHC 178 (KB)

Lepani Secake & Ors v Shared Services Connected Ltd

[2026] EWHC 1022 (KB)

Salford City Council v Fortis Developments Ltd & Ors

[2026] EWHC KB 702

Truter v Secretary of State for Justice

[2026] EWHC KB 825

CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

[2026] UKSC 5

Bromcom Computers Plc v Arbor Education Partners Ltd & Ors

[2026] EWHC KB 379

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.