22 April 2025 Keith Rix 3769 Case Updates Not a bridge too far – dental negligence by Keith Rix Commentary The detail of this case is of relevance to dental experts and attention is drawn to the clarity and particularity with which Professor Harding set out the instances of treatment of the Claimant which was below the standard she could reasonably have expected and then identified the consequences thereof. There is a gastroenterological and pharmacological dimension to the case because it was alleged, and found, that the pain resulting from the negligent dental treatment necessitated treatment with NAISDs which caused ischaemic colitis. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags CausationDentistryConsent10. Records Assessments and Site VisitsBridgeImplantIschaemic ColitisNSAID11. Report Writing Related articles A Day in the Life of an Occupational Therapy Expert Witness Expert Report or MG11 form? Lorimer-Wing v Hashmi [2026] EWHC 1843 (Ch) Dermot Speight & Ors (as trustees of the Thornaby Angling Association) v Robert James Pickersgill [2026] EWCC 48 Be cautious when accepting instructions from a Litigant in Person Switch article Pacemaker PTSD? Previous Article Does the face fit? Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.