Expert radiology evidence for claims that turn on chest imaging
Consultant Cardiothoracic Radiologist providing independent, CPR Part 35 compliant expert reports in clinical negligence and personal injury, for claimants, defendants and as a single joint expert.
Dr Haroon Azam BMBS FRCR · GMC 7420097 (Specialist Register) · Wolverhampton, West Midlands
Where I can assist the court
Breach of duty in the interpretation and reporting of imaging, causation so far as it rests on imaging review, and condition and prognosis where imaging based.
Missed and delayed lung cancer diagnosis
Interpretation of chest radiographs and CT where malignancy was diagnosed late. My daily clinical work within a lung cancer screening programme centres on early detection and the standards governing nodule reporting and follow-up.
Pulmonary nodule management
Whether follow-up of indeterminate nodules met British Thoracic Society guidance and screening standards, and whether reporting communicated the need for it.
Acute and emergency reporting
The standard of on-call and emergency reporting across general cross-sectional imaging and plain film, including CT in major trauma, grounded in an extensive consultant history of acute NHS and teleradiology work.
Pulmonary embolism
CT pulmonary angiography interpretation, missed emboli, and the adequacy of imaging pathways in suspected PE.
Interstitial lung disease
High-resolution CT interpretation and the imaging contribution to diagnosis and staging of ILD.
General radiology across all modalities
Reporting standards in general radiology across CT, MRI, ultrasound and plain film, in routine, urgent and elective settings, grounded in a continuous consultant general workload alongside subspecialty practice.
Opinions protected from hindsight
The question in a reporting case is not whether a finding is visible in retrospect, but whether a reasonably competent radiologist, exercising ordinary care, would have been expected to identify and report it under the conditions at the time.
Blinded first-pass review, on the record
Where an opinion concerns the standard of original reporting, I review the index imaging and record my findings before reading any material that reveals the clinical outcome. The sequence is documented and stated in the report, so the court can see that the opinion was formed under conditions approximating those of the original reporter.
Every report is prepared to CPR Part 35, Practice Direction 35 and the Guidance for the Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims 2014: the substance of all instructions stated, facts separated from opinion and by source, the range of opinion summarised with reasons, matters that detract from my opinion included, and any qualification stated.
Through chairing my department's REALM discrepancy meetings and leading its missed lung cancer audit, the distinction between a discrepancy, an error and a breach of an acceptable standard is one I work with systematically in clinical governance, not only in litigation.
Qualifications and standing
| Current appointment | Consultant Cardiothoracic Radiologist, The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (New Cross Hospital), September 2020 to present |
| Registration | General Medical Council Specialist Register, 7420097 · Fellow of the Royal College of Radiologists (2019) · Member, British Society of Thoracic Imaging · Indemnity: Medical Defence Union |
| Qualifications | FRCR (2019) · BMBS, University of Nottingham (2013) · MSc Cancer Therapeutics, Queen Mary University of London (2008) · BSc Medical Science, University of Birmingham (2007) |
| Lung cancer screening | Part of the leadership team, NHS Lung Cancer Screening Programme (Black Country) · BSTI Level 2 Lung Cancer Screening accreditation (2025) |
| Expert witness training | Cardiff University Bond Solon Civil Expert Witness Certificate: Report Writing completed April 2026; Courtroom Skills, Cross-Examination and Civil Law & Procedure modules complete September 2026 |
| Governance | Chair, departmental REALM discrepancy meetings · Lead auditor, missed lung cancers on chest radiographs (2025) and BTS nodule follow-up compliance |
A full medico-legal CV is available on request.
A clear process, from first call to served report
Free suitability call
A telephone discussion, without charge, to confirm whether the case falls within my expertise before you commit to it. Cases outside my field are declined at this stage.
Conflict check and terms
Written confirmation of parties checked for conflicts, with terms of engagement and fee schedule supplied for agreement before work begins.
Materials request
A structured list of what I need, including imaging in DICOM format and the referral information available to the original reporter, with outcome-revealing material identified so the blinded review can be preserved.
Report to timetable
A timescale agreed on receipt of complete papers, prompt warning of any risk to it, and a report structured for the court in plain English.
What I accept
- Claimant, defendant and single joint expert instructions in clinical negligence and personal injury
- Screening opinions on whether a case has merit, before full instruction
- Supplementary work: answers to Part 35 questions, experts' discussions and joint statements, conferences with counsel
- Legally aided cases at LAA codified rates, with certificate confirmed in advance
Fee schedule and terms of engagement are available on request. Fees are never conditional on the outcome of a case.
Discuss a potential instruction
Based in Wolverhampton, West Midlands. Available for instructions nationally; imaging review is undertaken remotely and conferences can be attended in person across the Midlands or by video.
The most useful first email includes: the nature of the claim, the imaging in question and its dates, the party you act for, and your timetable. I reply to all professional enquiries within two working days.
This site is for instructing solicitors and legal professionals. It does not provide medical or legal advice, and no expert-client relationship arises until instructions are accepted in writing. My overriding duty in any instruction is to the court.