Mark Lomas > Chambers of David Berkley KC > Winchester, England > Barrister Profile

Mark Lomas

01962 868884 mark.lomas@3pb.co.uk View profile View profile

Work Department

Personal Injury; Clinical Negligence, Inquests

Position

Mark Stephen Lomas is a highly experienced advocate.  After an early background in criminal trial advocacy and a wide variety of common law claims, he has spent more than 25 years developing a specialist practice in personal injury and clinical negligence litigation and related aspects of professional negligence and inquisitorial hearings.

He acts for both Claimants and Defendants in personal injury claims and predominantly for Claimants in clinical negligence claims.

Mark is an Accredited Mediation Advocate.

Personal Injury

• Mark acts for Defendants and Claimants in personal injury matters and has a related practice at inquests and in professional negligence actions arising out of personal injury claims.

  Mark has a particular interest in catastrophic injury claims involving both traumatic brain injury and spinal injury and also in fatal accident claims.  He has expertise in the valuation of complex damages claims involving multiple expert witnesses and, often, accountancy evidence.  He has wide experience in acting for children and protected parties.

  Mark has long experience acting in claims arising out of injury connected to marine activities.  Claims experience includes claims by both crew and passengers for injury aboard car ferries, cruise ships and cargo vessels and a claim involving a piracy attack against a cruise ship.  He has also acted in claims relating to injury in leisure and light craft including canoes, white water inflatables, sailing boats, power boats, canal barges, speed boats, ribs and rib racing.   Mark also has considerable experience in claims arising out of the shipping container industry, including injury relating to the loading and unloading of cargo, both on board vessels and on the quayside and involving container terminal practices and machinery.

  His experience extends to injury arising in a wide variety of circumstances including the following:

  • Accidents at work, with particular emphasis in the construction, docks, assembly line production and logistics industries
  • Industrial disease, with particular emphasis on asbestosis related disease and work related upper limb disorders
  • Psychiatric injury, stress at work and harassment
  • Road traffic accidents, with particular emphasis on motor cycle accidents
  • Other transport incidents including marine accidents, injury on the railway and air transport claims
  • Injury by animals, including both the common issues of dogs and horses but also other species from cattle to elephants
  • Military accidents and injury claims
  • Historic (and recent) sexual abuse
  • Injury caused by criminal assault, including deliberate injury with motor vehicles, marine piracy, physical assault, rape, shooting and murder.

  Recent cases:

  • G – Multiple injury, including brain injury suffered by a pedestrian hit by a bus, injury further complicated by a fresh brain injury after hospital discharge, yet again compounded by a poor outcome from a later remedial neurosurgical procedure. Claim complicated by the claimant’s prior ankylosing spondylosis and paranoid schizophrenia.
  • M – Serious brain injury caused to pedestrian run over when crossing the road at night.  Substantial dispute over liability and quantum complicated by pre-existing psychiatric conditions.
  • B – Lorry driver unable to retain an HGV licence and his employment, following facial injuries, the loss of one eye and severe psychological injury after being struck in the face by a defective container door.
  • D – Motorcyclist suffering nerve injury, psychological and spinal injury following a collision with a car, which turned in front of him. The quantum was complicated by the fact that he had suffered serious spinal injury in a prior accident. Inability to run a successful business and substantial losses arising.
  • B – Mesothelioma claim based upon exposure in the construction industry and complicated by circumstances of low exposure.
  • B – Acting for the widow of former engineer in electricity generating stations, who died of mesothelioma after asbestos exposure working in a number of different stations.
  • B – Acting for the family of a motorcyclist killed in a collision with a car.  Claim complicated by the fact that the motorcyclist was travelling at extreme speed (over 100 mph in a 50 mph limit) when a car pulled out in front of him on the limits of visibility.
  • T – Acting for the family of builder killed when falling from a ladder whilst fitting double glazing.  Liability was disputed on the basis that he was a self-employed sub-contractor responsible for his own working arrangements and health and safety and that the general work method was safe and the accident caused solely by his personal error.
  • A – Acting for the widow of a 70 year old professor of agriculture electrocuted by the domestic electricity supply of a privately rented house on a large country estate within a few weeks of taking the lease.
  • S – Acting for the widow of a driver killed in a road accident.  The deceased witnessed an accident on a dual carriageway and stopped and walked back to assist the injured driver.  As he did so another vehicle also stopped and reversed back to the accident site and in so doing ran him down and killed him.
  • G – Severe, traumatic brain injury caused to a man hit by a double decker bus on a city centre pedestrian crossing at night, resulting in a catastrophic injury claim.
  • G – Teenage, rear seat car passenger suffered a severe traumatic brain injury following the loss of control of the car and collision with a tree, resulting in a catastrophic injury claim.
  • B – A flooded road caused the claimant to cross to the opposing carriageway and collide with an oncoming car.  The other driver suffered fatal injury and the claimant suffered multiple injury, including psychiatric injury causing him to take his own life 5 years later, leading to a Fatal Accidents Act claim.
  • L – Serviceman killed by a car whilst on a pedestrian crossing, giving rise to a substantial Fatal Accidents Act claim
  • W – Motorcyclist killed by van turning across his path, leading to a substantial Fatal Accidents Act claim
  • G – Severe hand injury caused by entrapment in machinery in a container terminal
  • S – Severe neck injury caused when construction worker struck by falling materials on a building site
  • M – Bilateral HAVS and carpal tunnel syndrome caused by using vibrating hand tools at work as a metal fabricator
  • E – Claim for damages for advanced pleural thickening caused by direct industrial asbestos exposure
  • A – Claim for damages for mesothelioma caused by childhood exposure to asbestos dust from father’s overalls in the 1960’s
  • F – Death from mesothelioma; direct industrial exposure
  • S – Death from mesothelioma; environmental exposure through living and working nearby an asbestos factory in the 1940’s and 1960’s.
  • M & E – Sexual abuse of children by mother’s partner during the 1970’s
  • I – Death of crew member following collision between a dredger and a sailing yacht at sea
  • M – Death from mesothelioma; environmental exposure when working as a caretaker in a school.

Clinical Negligence 

Mark acts predominantly for Claimants in a variety of claims for clinical negligence against medical, dental and other therapeutic providers extending to claims against GPs (and practice employees), GDPs, and hospital staff to consultant level including cases of the utmost evidential complexity, catastrophic injury and fatality. He has a related practice at inquests and in professional negligence actions arising out of medical negligence claims and has acted in GMC disciplinary proceedings.

Recent cases:

• M – B A claim arising out of the negligent re-siting of a gastrostomy tube in a young child, leading to sepsis, cardiac arrest, brain injury and multi organ failure.
• Y – I A claim arising out of the delayed diagnosis of a knee injury, leading to the patient requiring 8 major procedures instead of a straightforward treatment.
• N – W A claim arising out of the alleged misdiagnosis and subsequent treatment of a patient with a uterine abnormality causing multiple miscarriages.
• P – S A claim arising out of the delayed treatment and inadequate care for a prisoner’s tracheostomy, leading to permanent lung damage and breathing difficulties.
• B – B A claim arising out of the negligent care of a stroke patient, amidst his relative unwillingness to cooperate. The claim involved detailed review of hospital’s care plans, protocols and records.
• M – N A claim arising out of the defendant’s failure to diagnose a recurring brain tumour and the neurological damage resulting from delayed surgery.
• T – P A claim arising out of repeated (3 procedures) upper gastrointestinal surgery to remedy reflux, resulting in the inability to take a solid diet and chronic pain.
• W – S A claim arising out of the failure to detect and treat bowel cancer in a patient suffering from ulcerative colitis, resulting in his death, aged 30.
• P – U A claim arising out of a hospital’s failure to follow up on a patient’s diabetic retinopathy, resulting in the need for prolonged, invasive treatment and damage to vision.
• G – W A claim arising out of a hospital’s inability to detect and treat DVT and pulmonary embolism and the resulting impact on the patient’s reduced function at work.
• W – A claim arising out of the failure by an Emergency Department to diagnose and treat a canimorsus capnocytophaga infection, leading to near fatal sepsis, multi organ failure and limb amputation.
• S – A claim arising out of the failure by a general practitioner to investigate symptoms which would have led to diagnosis of a testicular cancer in good time, leading to the development of advanced cancer, severe illness and prolonged symptoms affecting a career as a professional racing driver.
• B – A claim arising out of spinal cord injury sustained during spinal surgery.  The claim was advanced upon the basis both of lack of informed consent to the injurious aspects of the surgery and in failing to provide prompt remedial surgery to reduce the consequences of injury.
• B – A claim arising out of the failure to investigate the claimant and detect a leak from an anastomosis formed during a laparoscopic bariatric procedure, leading to advanced sepsis and death.
• A – A claim arising out of the failure to detect and treat a bowel perforation during laparoscopic pelvic surgery, leading to severe illness, a de-functioning ileostomy, chronic pain, prescribed opiate addiction and psychiatric injury.
• A – A claim arising out of the failure by an optometrist to investigate abnormality of vision following a sight test that would have revealed the presence of, and enabled earlier treatment of, a brain tumour.
• M – A claim arising out of the failure by two consecutive general practitioners to diagnose / treat infective mastitis leading to prolonged hospitalisation for PVL-SA infection and pneumonia and requiring repeated surgery for advanced breast abscesses.
• R – A claim arising out of surgery for ectopic pregnancy in which the wrong fallopian tube was removed, causing reduced fertility and psychiatric injury.
• S – A claim arising out of the death of an unborn child following hypoxic damage suffered after the mother experienced post-operative bleeding following surgery to treat an ovarian cyst.
• C – A claim arising out of negligently conducted shoulder surgery of hemiarthroplasty.

Inquests 

For many years, Mark has undertaken the representation of interested parties at Inquests, whether in short form, Jamieson type, proceedings or the more wide ranging inquiry of Middleton type proceedings mandated by Article 2 ECHR and both with and without a jury.

Mark is well versed in the differing approaches required to represent the interests of a bereaved family as well as those of an interest party whose potential responsibility for a death may become the focus of the proceedings and is experienced in the representation of both.

He has previously been involved in cases:

Within the clinical care field, including the deaths of babies and those who lack mental capacity, concerning:

• Failure to diagnose a condition and treat a patient, for instance: cardiac failure / respiratory distress
• Failure to monitor and support patients with high care needs, for instance: tracheotomy or parenteral nutrition requirements
• Death in the course of or immediately consequent upon surgery
• Death linked to prescribed, potentially harmful, medication
• Care of the elderly, nursing home falls and neglect.

Outside the clinical negligence field, concerning:

• Highway defect
• Road traffic collision
• Industrial accident
• Light aircraft crash
• Canal boat / lock fatality
• Murder by a prisoner on licence.

Career

Year of call 1983

Memberships

• Personal Injury Bar Association (PIBA)
• Professional Negligence Bar Association (PNBA
• Accredited Mediation Advocate

Education

Peter Symonds College Winchester; Keele University (1982 BA in Law and Politics 2(1)).