Writing for today's The Scotsman, BLM's Fiona McEwan examines the case of Hastings v Finsbury Orthopaedics Ltd and Another, which has already made Scottish legal history.
This was the first case in which evidence was heard by a Scottish court on an alleged defect in a hip replacement product in litigation raised under the Consumer Protection Act 1987.
Fiona explained, "There have been two appeals in the case. The second, and final, one was recently heard at the United Kingdom Supreme Court. Their judgment will likely be issued within the next three to nine months. Mr Hastings, a former forestry worker, had a history of arthritis. Aged 54, he was fitted with "metal on metal" ("MoM") prosthetic total hip replacements, in both hips. Three years later, he underwent revision of his left-sided implant. He claims to have suffered damage by metal debris from the prosthetic product. He raised a court action under the CPA seeking compensation from two companies who had manufactured components used in his hip replacements. He claims that the replacement hip products used were defective."
To read Fiona's full analysis, please click here to be redirected to The Scotsman website.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
