AMOD v Dentist
The Plaintiff’s medical negligence claim relates to a dental procedure carried out in December 2004. The Plaintiff presented at the dentist’s surgery with a bifurcation fracture of her LL6 tooth. The Defendant dentist undertook radiographs of the said tooth which disclosed the existence of a root filing and a fractured instrument already present in the LL6 at the time in December 2004. Despite the Plaintiff’s signs and symptoms, the Defendant proceeded to restore the Plaintiff’s LL6 tooth by way of root canal treatment and/or crowning rather than extraction. As a consequence of this treatment, the Plaintiff was caused to suffer constant pain and discomfort in her mouth until the said tooth was removed in 2007. The Defendant argued that the case was Statute barred as proceedings were not issued until November 2010. The Plaintiff relied on her date of knowledge with regards to the Statute of Limitations and ultimately the case settled prior to the trial date for significant damages plus costs.
If you have any further queries, please contact any of the following from our medical negligence group:
- Michael Boylan, Managing Partner
30 July 2013