Summary of Particulars

­            CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE (in part)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE                                          CLAIM NO.  HQ11X01668

QUEENS BENCH DIVISION                                               

between:-

ROBIN PHILIP CLARKE

Claimant

and

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

/ THE CHIEF DENTAL OFFICER

Defendant

SUMMARY OF PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

(a)    This case involves two causes of action:
(i) negligent breach of duty of care; (ii) release of a dangerous thing, namely poisonous mercury vapour causing foreseeable injuries.

(b)   Certain Officers of the DH have responsibility for formulating advice or regulations relating to the safety or harmfulness of use of dental amalgam (which releases toxic mercury vapour).

(c)    In so doing they have a duty of care to all those patients whose treatment depends on that advice or regulations. (Paras 9-16)

(d)   The Officers of the DH have consistently advised that there is no systemic toxicity from use of amalgam.

(e)    In formulating their advice they have had a duty of care to have due regard to evidence of harm, rather than selectively acknowledging only facts suggesting safety.

(f)     The Defendants breached this duty by systematically failing to take account of or even mention the facts and reasoning indicating harmfulness. (Paras 19-27)

(g)    The Claimant experienced good health up to and including age 16, as was reflected in his easy excellence in grammar school exams.  But thereafter, he developed multiple severe mental and physical disabilities such that he was unable to complete his education or career, and has had to depend on disability benefits in the decades ever since.

(h)    The nature and severity of his injuries are clearly demonstrable via documented facts of his exceptionally peculiar biography.  These include the secret “thinking-books” he created during several years circa 1973-1982.
(Paras 44-107)

(i)      Various facts rule out alternative causations for his disabilities.

(j)     Various facts decisively point to the dental amalgams as the cause.

(k)   Asserted expertise on causation is the tort itself in this case, rather than serving as evidential input.  There is no real expert skill and none is required anyway.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I believe that the facts stated in this Summary of Particulars of Claim are true.

  

---------------------------------------------------------------

Signed

Robin Philip Clarke

Claimant

Dated