Clinical negligence costs are once again in the spotlight, with the Government seeking to reform the system and questions being raised about how the current system can be more sustainable. In September, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) published its own proposals for addressing clinical negligence costs while preserving access to justice.

There is an assumption that aesthetic treatment claims arise only due to the fact that a procedure has been performed poorly, but in reality, the factors involved are frequently more complex.

Recurring themes seen in medico-legal reviews offer valuable insight into clinical practice and highlight the importance of the decisions made throughout the patient journey.

I think many people assume expert witnesses are instructed because they already hold an opinion someone wants confirmed. In reality, this is exactly what should not happen.

Once an outcome is known, particularly an adverse one, it often appears more predictable than it was at the time. This is known as hindsight bias. It is a well-recognised cognitive bias in legal analysis, and it has a direct impact on how cases in aesthetic medicine are interpreted.