What Is the Objective Standard of Care (Bolam Test)?

The Bolam test asks whether a professional acted in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of professionals skilled in the same field. It is an objective standard of care: the court assesses the defendant’s conduct against professional practice, not against what that defendant personally thought was careful.

How it applies

In negligence, a person who owes a duty of care must meet the required standard. If they fall below it, they may have breached that duty. For a professional task, the standard is that of a reasonably competent professional carrying out that task. The test takes its name from Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee and is often discussed in medical negligence.

The court considers expert evidence about accepted practice. A defendant does not automatically breach their duty just because another group of professionals would have acted differently. A responsible body may support more than one approach, and the defendant does not need to show that their approach was the most popular.

Example

Suppose a doctor chooses one of two recognised treatments. Some competent doctors would choose the other treatment, but a responsible body of doctors supports the choice made. That disagreement alone would not establish a breach under Bolam.

There is an important limit. Under Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, the court does not have to accept professional opinion simply because experts express it: that opinion must withstand logical analysis. A practice supported by experts can therefore still fall below the required standard.

Exam mistake to avoid: do not describe Bolam as a test of whether the defendant did their personal best, or assume that any supporting expert automatically settles the issue. Apply the standard to the particular professional conduct in the question.