UAE Medical Malpractice Data Reporting: What’s in the Public Interest

In the Emirates 24/7 piece “Dentistry tops UAE medical errors list as complaints drop 42%” published 1 July 2026 (‘the Emirates 24/7 Article’), the Chairman of the Supreme Committee of Medical Liability – the highly respected Consultant Physician and Endocrinologist Dr Abdul Razzaq Ali Al Madani (‘Dr Al Madani’) shares – albeit limited – raw data that the writer finds of particular interest. In this second article in a series of three commentary articles, the writer will look at how the UAE and UK go about the business of reporting data related to medical error/negligence and what lessons can be learned therefrom.

 

UAE Medical Malpractice Data Reporting – Scope and Extent – What’s in the Public Interest

1. The data shared in the Emirates 24/7 Article is presented in the style of an interview or conversation with Dr Al Madani and, essentially, the raw data comprises:

SCML- Appeal /Grievances

Year	Appeals Received	Appeals Cleared/Completed
2021	651	132
2022	582	303
2023	365	612
2024	319	701
2025	378	477
2026 (Partial)	173	181

 

Medical Speciality as % of Total Medical Errors- 2025

% of Total	Medical Speciality
32%	Dentistry
19%	Ob/Gyn
11%	Neurosurgery
10%	Orthopaedics
9%	Cosmetics Surgery

 

2. Leaving aside the Emirates 24/7 Article, in the UAE there is no public reporting of the number of appeals/grievances to SCML that recorded respectively “No Medical Error”, “Medical Error” or “Serious Medical Error”, or indeed any indication whether appeals emanate from the patients’ side or the Medical Service Providers’ side, or indeed from both sides. Moreover, there is no public reporting of the number of initial complaints made by patients and/or their families – broken down by medical speciality segment – and what the findings were, i.e. “No Medical Error”, “Medical Error” or “Serious Medical Error”, etc. In both MLC Reports and SCML Reports, the three findings described appear in a ‘tick box’ format and only one box is ‘ticked’ in the respective reports. It appears relatively straightforward to capture/analyse this data field at each stage – if, of course, UAE policymakers discerned a reasonable benefit in doing so or deemed it to be in the public interest.

 

3. The Emirates 24/7 Article – helpfully – makes some general comments concerning the appeal mechanics and the work of the SCML, together with some examples of what constitutes ‘medical error’, ‘serious medical error’ and ‘no medical error’. It then describes five medical specialities accounting for a percentage of total cases where there was a “medical error” found by the SCML. It is unclear if this includes findings of ‘serious medical error’ alongside simple ‘medical error’. Dr Al Madani links the high number of dental errors to dentists “exceeding their areas of expertise and the growing demand for cosmetic procedures influenced by social media expectations.” The informal nature of the mode of presentation leaves several important aspects of the data unclear and, given the importance of the subject matter, a more formal mode of presentation could be reasonably argued to be preferable – particularly in light of the writer’s further comments/suggestions below.

 

4. In other jurisdictions – particularly where there is a Universal Healthcare System with “Socialised” medicine, such as the United Kingdom – the scale/extent of medical malpractice data reporting has considerations of transparency in public spending and consumer awareness but – perhaps more pointedly – it also serves as a tool to identify recurring/systemic patterns or themes of error/harm and utilise that pattern to identify ways and means to implement prevention. It is a significant step beyond mere deterrence as a means of influencing normative behaviours by using data to drive improved healthcare standards – through lessons learned through the experience/pain/suffering of, perhaps, groups of patients over several years.

UK/NHS Resolution – More than Mere Claims Management

5. The UK Department of Health agency NHS Resolution – which changed its name from the NHS Litigation Authority over a decade ago – provides annual reports of comprehensive depth/detail on the management and resolution of thousands of new medical malpractice/clinical claims received against NHS Trusts/Hospitals/Practitioners. On 9 July 2026, NHS Resolution published its 192-page Annual Report and Accounts, comprising extensive data relating to, inter alia, some 15,000 medical malpractice claims dealt with/settled/cleared – including total monetary settlement amounts/legal costs being paid out of GBP 3.238 billion (including legal costs) and a breakdown of the specialist areas that claims are comprised of. However, NHS Resolution sees itself not just as an agency to manage the settlement/resolution of medical claims but also – strategically – to promote the sharing of learning across the NHS system to improve patient care, particularly for maternity and neonatal patients.

 

6. NHS Resolution produces regular practice updates that are circulated throughout NHS hospitals periodically that highlight ‘at-risk’ practices that have been highlighted by cases/disputes that the Agency has handled, sometimes observed over a period of a number of years. ‘Ten Years of Maternity Claims – An Analysis of NHS Litigation Authority Data’ (‘The Maternity Analysis Report’) reviewed over 5,000 cases over a ten-year period. The Maternity Analysis Report raised awareness and educated NHS Obstetrics/Gynaecology professionals – throughout the UK – on recurring/systemic issues and practices that were to be avoided or approached with particular awareness/caution. The actual number of women/newborns in the UK spared from serious injury/disability and lifetimes of pain and suffering due to the impact of the Maternity Analysis Report cannot be calculated, although each of us will have our own personal views on the value of the report. NB payments/settlements of negligence claims for maternity and neonatal care matters account for 40% of the total amounts paid out in 2025/2026. In 2024/2025, it accounted for 42%. This may provide one possible explanation for why NHS Resolution places strategic importance on safety and learning in this area.

 

7. Clearly, the respective statutory obligations/functions of the SCML and NHS Resolution are fundamentally/vastly different in scope, operation and extent, and indeed the UAE and UK medical health systems are about as different as can be. NHS Resolution employs nearly 900 staff and has an annual budget paid for out of general taxation of some GBP 78 million. Clearly, the UAE does not require an NHS Resolution-style agency nor a management of disputes function. However, the comprehensive and accurate reporting of MLC and SCML data, including actual findings of medical error/no medical error/serious medical error and its analysis – leading to implementation – has the potential to drive an improved/augmented safety and learning function, contributing to improved patient care across the UAE healthcare system.

 

8. As one recent article puts it – “When national standards rise, accountability increases. Medical malpractice stops being a background legal issue and becomes something that shapes behaviour, pricing, reputation, and decision-making across the healthcare system. Malpractice is no longer individual. It’s structural.” (see “Medical Malpractice in the UAE & GCC: Why the Stakes Are Rising and Why That Creates Opportunity” 19/01/2026 | Octopus”).

 

9. For the reasons above, more extensive medical malpractice data collection/analysis/reporting, particularly in the area of maternity and neonatal claims – whether this is a function of AI programmes or ‘Big Data’ applications – appears to have a significant part to play in driving improvements in medical standards/products/services. This augmented safety and learning function may well transcend the remit of the SCML and require scrutiny/commitment at the highest levels of Policy/Decision-making within the Ministry of Health and Prevention to determine next steps.

In the final article in this three-part series, we shall examine the breakdown of cases by medical speciality and discuss how the MLC/SCML and the UAE Courts navigate management of cases where there are catastrophic and/or serious brain injuries.

 

Stephen Ballantine Senior Counsel, Head of Catastrophic and Complex Injury Claims [email protected]