Robert Mills


Robert Mills 1

Call: 2014
Qualifications: Bar Professional Training Course, Kaplan Law School London.
Graduate Diploma in Law, Kaplan Law School London.
Graduate LLB, Kaplan Law School London.
MA (Cantab) Philosophy, Selwyn College, University of Cambridge.
Professional Memberships: AvMA
Awards: Tancred Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn.
Lord Brougham Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn.
Hardwicke Entrance Award, Lincoln’s Inn.

Expertise


Clinical negligence is the focus of Robert’s practice. He undertakes a wide range of clinical negligence work, with a particular interest in orthopaedic and oncological cases.

Robert is experienced in handling high value clinical negligence litigation involving life-changing injuries. He regularly conducts fatal accident litigation. He provides specialist advice on high value claims for care, loss of earnings and pension loss.

Robert’s recent notable cases include:

  • H v UHLNT [2018] – On-going
    Robert acts for the Claimant, as Junior Counsel to Matthew Phillips QC. This is a claim for undiagnosed fractures of both shoulder blades. The shoulders healed in a sub-optimal position, leading to severe restrictions in range of movement and significant care needs. The Claimant had pre-existing schizophrenia and there is an argument concerning whether the new care required is qualitatively or quantitatively different to that which he previously required. The index negligence is further said to have exacerbated the pre-existing schizophrenia. The pleaded value of the case is in excess of £1,000,000.00.
  • C v PHNT [2018] – On-going
    Robert acts for the Claimant in this case concerning alleged negligence in performing bowel surgery. It is alleged that the development of a post-operative fistula was as a result of intra-operative negligence. The Claimant’s case is that she underwent multiple unnecessary procedures under general anaesthetic to treat this fistula. She has been left with permanent chronic pain and a requirement for extensive plastic surgery. She has also sustained psychological injury. Damages are pleaded in excess of £750,000.00.
  • C v CTULHB [2018]
    Robert acted for the Defendant in a claim concerning negligently performed hip replacement surgery. High value care and accommodation claims took the special damages claim to over £650,000.00. Psychiatric and orthopaedic damage claims were advanced. 4 experts were instructed on each side. Liability was admitted but fundamental dishonesty arguments were raised in relation to the quantum case. The claim settled for a sum significantly below that pleaded.
  • R v RUHBNT [2018] – On-going
    Robert acts for the Claimant in this case concerning an alleged negligent failure to diagnose a scaphoid fracture. The delay in treatment has resulted in significantly reduced movement and strength in the Claimant’s wrist. As a result she will no longer be able to pursue her career as a nurse and a high value loss of earnings and pension claim are advanced. The Claimant further says that she has suffered a loss of congenial employment. A provisional damages claim is made for the risk of future surgeries and their complications. The pleaded value of the case in excess of £1,000,000.00.
  • V v HDULB [2018]
    Robert acted for the Defendant in this claim for neurological injury arising out of hip replacement surgery. Liability and quantum were in dispute. The experts disagreed as to whether the sciatic nerve would have been exposed during the index procedure, risking injury. The Defendant’s case was that the neurological symptoms which the Claimant now reports are unrelated to the index surgery. The Claimant’s DWP records also revealed extensive co-morbidities and associated care needs which had not been accounted for in a Schedule of Loss worth over £600,000.00. A fundamental dishonesty case was advanced. Settlement was reached significantly below the pleaded value.
  • H v CRHNFT [2018] – On-going
    Robert acted for the Claimant in this case. The first episode in the case concerned the alleged negligent discharge of the Claimant from hospital when she was suffering from a post-operative bleed. She suffered a traumatic period at home before returning for a gynaecological procedure which was allegedly negligently performed without pain relief. The Claimant developed PTSD and her pre-existing somatoform pain disorder was exacerbated. The Defendant is also said to have failed to diagnose the Claimant’s breast cancer and the knowledge of this delay, combined with invasive treatment, further exacerbated the somatoform symptoms.
  • S v DGNT (1) DM (2) KCHNFT (3) [2017]
    Robert acted for the Claimant in this case where a below knee amputation was required as a result of clinical negligence in failing to diagnose a vascular condition. Damages consisted of a notable future care claim and future provision for prostheses. Expert evidence on life expectancy had a material influence on the value of the future losses. There was a claim for psychiatric injury and also disadvantage on the labour market. Settlement was reached in the sum of £200,000.00
  • B v WVHT [2016]
    Robert acted for the Defendant in this claim arising out of an alleged failure to diagnose and treat sepsis, which was said to have led to the Deceased’s death. Although a delay in treatment of around 6 hours was admitted, it was denied that the dose of antibiotics provided was incorrect. It was further the Defendant’s case that the Deceased was in such a weakened state that she would have died at the same time in any event. The claim was pleaded at over £150,000 in value. There was a complex argument as to the service dependency claim and when the Deceased would have become incapacitated in any event. Settlement was eventually reached after service of Robert’s Counter-Schedule of Loss.

Robert also has a particular interest in dental negligence and is instructed on around 50 dental cases which are litigating currently. His work covers a wide range of high value cases involving failure to treat periodontal disease, misdiagnosis of caries, negligent loss of an evulsed teeth, negligent orthodontic treatment, occlusal problems, as well as negligently performed root canal treatments and crowning of teeth. He is also experienced in advising on issues of consent and also contributory negligence in dental claims

Recent notable dental cases include:

  • G v Z [2018]
    Robert represented the Claimant at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. The Claimant was awarded the highest general damages award ever reported in a dental negligence case in the sum of £65,000.00. The total damages award was in excess of £160,000.00 which was also the highest ever reported in a dental claim. This was a claim for extensive restorative treatment arising out of a wide range of negligently performed dental treatment.

    There were four elements to general damages:

  1. The loss of nine otherwise healthy teeth.
  2. 37 unnecessary items of dental treatment including crowns and root canal fillings.
  3. Occlusal problems such that the Claimant had only three contact points in her mouth and was unable to eat hard foods.
  4. Psychological injury in the form of post-traumatic stress disorder and specific phobia anxiety relating to dental treatment.
  • B v R [2018] – On-going
    Robert represents the Claimant in this case where it is alleged that a failure to promptly place implants following tooth extraction has prevented the Claimant from being able to undergo restorative treatment at all. The Claimant is now prevented from eating hard foods which are required to treat her pre-existing bowel condition. A significant pain, suffering and loss of amenity claim including psychological injury is advanced.
  • G v T (1) P(2) [2017]
    Robert represented the Claimant in this claim for negligence arising out of a failure to diagnose periodontal disease. The Claimant lost multiple teeth and required implant treatment. There were significant complexities arising out of the multiple Defendants in this case, but the Claimant was able to obtain a good settlement.
  • S v BCULHB [2018] On-going
    Robert represents the Defendant in this claim. It is alleged that the Defendant dentist’s failure to extract retained roots in the Claimant’s mouth has led to significant pain and suffering as well as psychological injury. The Defendant will say that the decision to leave the roots in situ was an entirely reasonable one, which the Claimant consented to.
  • W v D (1) B(2) [2017]
    Robert represented the Claimant in this claim for negligence arising out of a failure to treat periodontal disease. Again there was a high value future implant claim, but with the added complexity of dealing with an uninsured Defendant. The Claimant advanced a causation case placing the bulk of liability on the insured Defendant and was able to obtain a good settlement.
  • F v R [2017]
    Robert represented the Claimant in this dental negligence claim which led to a significant loss of earnings claim. The Defendant had failed to treat a chronically infected tooth root before undertaking a bone graft procedure. The Claimant went on to suffer a serious post-operative infection and was prevented from undertaking a media role. The Claimant was able to settle the case for over £30,000.00.

 

Robert has gained experience across the spectrum of personal injury litigation including employer’s liability, occupier’s liability, Highways Act 1980 and road traffic cases. He advises on liability, quantum and the tactical progression of cases. He regularly represents both Claimants and Defendants at Fast Track and Multi Track trials.

Robert also has a particular interest in industrial disease work and has worked with other barristers on cases in this context, involving hand arm vibration syndrome, asbestosis, mesothelioma, carbon monoxide poisoning and tinnitus.

 

Practice Overview

Robert specialises in clinical negligence and personal injury litigation. He regularly conducts fast-track and multi-track trials for both claimants and defendants. Robert has experience across the spectrum of personal injury litigation, including employer’s liability, occupier’s liability, Highways Act 1980, road traffic cases and credit hire. He regularly attends applications relating to issues such as pre-action disclosure, default judgment, amendments to statements of case and strike out.

The core of Robert’s practice is clinical negligence. He acts for both claimants and defendants and has experience of litigation across a wide range of areas of medicine. Robert enjoys contributing to and shaping cases from the outset and regularly attends applications as well as costs and case management hearings with a view to preparing cases for trial or achieving optimum settlement results. Robert has a particular specialism in dental negligence which represents a significant component of his practice, consisting of a range of high value cases.

For further details of Robert’s experience in clinical negligence and personal injury, please click on the drop-down headings in the expertise section above.