Nathan Tavares KC - Clinical Negligence

Nathan has a wide ranging clinical negligence practice with particular emphasis on claims involving spinal cord injury (from spinal surgery, spinal abscess or discitis), birth injuries, and claims arising out of psychiatric negligence. He is ranked as a leader in the field in both Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners.

Notable cases:

• Various Claimants v Ministry of Defence – 2024
  This was a group action in which Nathan acted for a number of military personal who suffered long term psychiatric symptoms after negligently being prescribed the anti-malarial drug Lariam whilst on active duty. He was instructed by Irwin Mitchell and led Will Young from OTC. Medical causation was complex, namely whether Lariam is capable of altering the brain sufficiently to result in long term psychiatric damage. The case was resolved prior to trial.
• RSN (A Child, by his Mother, TJM) v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust – 2025
  Nathan acted for an 9 year old child who had suffered cerebral palsy from peri-natal negligence. A settlement with an overall value of in excess of £25million was achieved, with a combination of lump sum and periodical payments.
• AXB (By her mother, CXD) v University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust
  This was a clinical negligence action where the claimant suffered a hypoxic-ischaemic injury at birth and suffered cerebral palsy. Nathan acted for the claimant from when she was 3 years old until she was 18 when the case settled shortly before trial in January 2025 for c.£20 million. The claimant had complex psychiatric symptoms and an unusual presentation.
• FDS (by his litigation friend, JHG) v (1) Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, and (2) Dr Elizabeth Dawson [2021] EWHC 1550 (QB)
  Nathan acted for a claimant (instructed by Stewarts) who suffered a catastrophic stroke as a result of negligent prescription of Clopidogrel by the defendants. A settlement of liability was made with D1 at mediation, and the balance of the claim pursued against D2, who then alleged abuse of process, accord and satisfaction and other technical legal principles. The court made an important ruling on multi-party claims of this nature. Appeal to the Court of Appeal has been compromised. Quantum against D1 was finally resolved (after lengthy negotiations) in the sum of c.£10 million with a complex indemnity ensuring a minimum level of care funding in circumstances where the NHS was funding part of the care.
• BXD (by his mother, CXD) v (1) Berkshire Health Care NHS Foundation Trust, and (2) Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust
  Nathan acted for a boy who had suffered a spinal haematoma aged 4 which was negligently treated leaving him with permanent paraplegia. Causation was in issue with the likelihood that he would have suffered a degree of paraplegia in any event. The case settled shortly before trial at c.£4m.
• Hofer v The Bermuda Hospitals Board
  Nathan acted for claimant, a German national, who sustained tetraplegia when detained (whilst on holiday) by mental health services in Bermuda. The Hospital sought permission to appeal to the Privy Council in relation to a strike out application. Nathan drafted the documents which were adopted by the Privy Council in refusing permission