The BBC recently published a troubling article highlighting the case of Mr Marc Lamah - a surgeon banned from working in the private healthcare sector due to serious patient safety concerns, yet still operating within the NHS.

As a solicitor working in medical negligence, I find cases like this both professionally and personally troubling. They raise urgent questions about how effectively we monitor, manage and act upon risks to patient safety - especially when those risks are already known.

The background

Mr Lamah was barred by Nuffield Health - one of the UK’s largest private hospital groups after internal reviews concluded “his conduct did not meet the standards of medical practice… ” Yet, despite these serious red flags, Mr Lamah has continued to work in the NHS as a colorectal surgeon at the Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton which is part of The University Hospitals Sussex NHS Trust.

This has understandably left many asking: how is this possible?

Patient harm and delayed accountability

The BBC’s report documents the story of Sheryl Hunter who underwent colorectal surgery under Mr Lamah’s care. What followed, she alleges, was years of pain, physical limitations and corrective surgeries.

Others have come forward with similar experiences involving the same NHS Trust - some of which reportedly feature in Operation Bramber, a major police investigation into at least 200 cases of alleged medical negligence.

Perhaps most concerning is the apparent lack of timely action. Ms. Hunter raised concerns about the outcome of her surgery multiple times and yet they were belatedly addressed. Mr Lamah’s NHS employer maintains it has “robust systems ” in place, but these events seem to suggest otherwise.

What this means for patients - and for us

This case reinforces a pattern we in the field of medical negligence see too often:

• Warnings are raised, but not escalated
• Patients suffer preventable harm
• Accountability is unclear or absent

The divide between private and public oversight mechanisms also plays a role. While private hospitals like Nuffield may act quickly to restrict privileges, NHS trusts are often slower -  hampered by bureaucracy, resource pressures or reluctance to suspend long-serving staff.

For patients, the distinction between private and NHS care is largely irrelevant when harm occurs. They place trust in their clinician - not their contract.

The legal viewpoint

Legally, this case underscores the importance of thorough documentation, clear escalation procedures, and timely review of adverse outcomes. When these systems fail, the consequences are not only clinical but legal.

Patients who experience harm in such cases may have grounds for compensation but often, they also want answers, acknowledgment and reform.

As a solicitor, my goal is not only to represent those harmed by negligence, but also to shine a light on systemic failures that can – and must – be prevented.

Moving forward: Culture and change

The case of Mr Lamah should serve as a wake-up call. If a surgeon banned from private practice can continue operating within the NHS without full transparency we need to ask:

• Are current oversight systems sufficient?
• Are patient voices being heard early enough?
• Are we learning from adverse events - or burying them?

As both legal professionals and patient advocates, we must push for a system where safety, transparency and accountability are not optional - they’re the standard.

If you or a loved one have been affected by medical treatment you believe was negligent, please know that you’re not alone. There are routes to justice and support - and people ready to help you find them. 

Get in touch with our specialist team to discuss your experience in confidence. Call us on 0800 1380 458 or email help@switalskis.com