In His Dissenting Opinion in Gregg V Scott [2005] (The

Short Answer

In his dissenting opinion in Gregg v Scott [2005] (the case that has ruled out, at least for now, claims for 'lost chance' in a medical setting), Lord Nicholls said that the case:
'raises a question which has divided courts and commentators throughout the common law world. The division derives essentially from different perceptions of what constitutes injustice in a common type of medical negligence case. Some believe a remedy is essential and that a principled ground for providing an appropriate remedy can be found. Others are not persuaded. I am in the former camp' (at [1]).
He goes on to say that the idea that a patient can only recover damages if his original chance of recovery had been more than 50 per cent is '________ and indefensible' (at [3]).