Events
Event Information
Remote Event
Wed 08-Jul-2026, Microsoft Teams
Suspected Cauda Equina Syndrome and spinal cord compression claims often hinge on a single question: could earlier escalation have changed the outcome?
This session focuses on how those decisions are actually assessed in practice from first presentation through to imaging, referral, and decompression. It will help you understand where delays become defensible, where they don’t, and how access to MRI and specialist input is scrutinised when liability is in dispute.
In Cauda Equina Syndrome and acute spinal cord compression claims, the key issues rarely sit in isolation. They develop across a sequence of clinical decisions made under time pressure, often with incomplete or evolving information.
For solicitors, the challenge is not simply identifying delay, but evidencing when neurological compromise should have been recognised, whether escalation was appropriate, and how those decisions influenced outcome.
This session will focus on how these decision points are assessed in practice. It will explore how symptom progression, red flag indicators, clinical records, imaging, and operative findings are considered together when experts are asked to comment on breach and causation.
Particular attention will be given to the timing of intervention and its relationship to neurological outcome. You will gain clearer insight into how delays are evaluated, how expert opinion is formed, and where causation arguments are more likely to be challenged or supported.
The session will also examine how system factors such as triage, access to MRI, referral pathways, and communication breakdowns influence the clinical timeline, and how these are evidenced within a claim. It will highlight where expert opinion commonly diverges, what distinguishes stronger from weaker cases, and which aspects of the evidence tend to carry the greatest weight when advancing or defending a claim.
This session will help you to:
- Assess when delays in diagnosis or escalation are likely to meet the threshold for breach and causation
- Pinpoint the clinical decision moments around imaging, referral, and decompression that are most frequently challenged
- Interpret red flag symptoms within the context of the clinical records and how they are documented
- Evaluate whether the timing and adequacy of intervention aligns with the claimed neurological outcome
- Recognise how pathway and system failures contribute to liability and how they are evidenced
- Approach neurosurgical expert evidence with greater confidence in complex, high value claims
About The Speaker
Mr Nikolaos Tzerakis
Consultant Neurosurgeon and Spinal Surgeon
Mr Nikolaos Tzerakis is a Consultant Neurosurgeon with a specialist interest in spinal surgery at the University Hospital of North Midlands NHS Trust. Mr Tzerakis has undertaken medico-legal work since 2013, preparing reports on breach of duty, causation, and prognosis in both clinical negligence and personal injury cases. He has experience of claimant and defendant instructions and has attended court as an expert witness. He has been practising as a Consultant since 2012 and has participated in more than 4,000 cranial and spinal procedures. His experience includes emergency spinal referrals, decompression surgery, and multidisciplinary decision-making in high-pressure acute settings - areas central to many negligence claims involving delay and outcome. His clinical practice includes the management of acute spinal emergencies, including spinal cord compression and Cauda Equina Syndrome, as well as complex spinal pathology requiring surgical intervention. His combined clinical and medico-legal experience provides practical insight into how spinal cases are assessed, where expert opinion differs, and how timing, decision-making, and system factors influence litigation outcomes.