Ask us a question

Please fill in our form and one of our experts will get back to you. Alternatively, call our 24 hour number on:  0113 245 8549

Name is required
Please enter your email address
Please enter your telephone number
Please enter the best time for us to call you
Please enter the details of your enquiry
Please let us know how you heard about us
Please enter the verification code
  • Our clients
  • Our team
  • Your future

Delay in Diagnosis of Dispersion Glaucoma

M suffered from a rare ophthalmic condition called dispersion glaucoma, and believed that a failure on the part of the hospital treating him may have contributed to the severity of his condition.

Our approach

M asked us to investigate whether he might have shown signs of pigment dispersion earlier, and whether the doctors treating him might have missed this. As a failure to properly diagnose M meant he could not undergo the correct treatment in time to lower the impact of his ophthalmic issues.

The outcome

Our team were able to secure an admission of liability from the hospital. The hospital put forward an early offer of £200,000, which we advised him to reject. A further offer of £600,000 was then made, and accepted.

The case in detail

M had a rare ophthalmic condition caused dispersion glaucoma. Indeed such was the complexity of this condition that not many expert Ophthalmologists wanted to accept instructions to advise. Essentially M instructed Minton Morrills to investigate whether there was any evidence of pigment dispersion earlier and whether the Hospital whose care he was under should have regularly checked the pressure in his eyes and whether this would have resulted in a diagnosis being made earlier and with timely treatment whether this would have avoided the visual problems which M had.

This was an usual and complicated case but the expert team at Minton Morrills following initial investigations and negotiations with the hospitals legal team were able to secure an admission of liability.

The hospital put forward an early offer to resolve the claim in the sum of £200,000.00. It was necessary to provide M with appropriate legal advice and that offer was rejected. Following further intensive negotiations it was possible to secure a settlement for M in the sum of £600,000.00.