You may have grounds for a claim for compensation where it can be established:
That the care afforded to you by your GP fell below the standard expected of a GP and you suffered injury as a result of the substandard care.

This is the standard test for professional negligence, to include medical negligence and a claim will not be successful unless both limbs of the test are satisfied. The second element of the test is referred to in legal terms as causation.
It can be difficult to establish causation in medical negligence cases because obviously, the person had an injury, or ailment to begin with. This is the very reason they presented for care. In order to establish causation, it must be established, at a very minimum, that the substandard treatment complained of ‘materially contributed’ to the patient’s injury. A more preferable scenario would be that medical evidence establishes that ‘but for’ the substandard care complained of, the injury would have been avoided.
Examples of causation, or the adverse consequences of substandard treatment, in GP Claims include:

• The necessity for more invasive treatment- in delayed cancer diagnosis, patients might require surgery, or chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy which would have been avoided ‘but for’ the delayed diagnosis
• The availability of palliative care options only where curative options would have been available had a more timely diagnosis been made
• Catastrophic injuries due to failure to diagnose symptoms of stroke or meningitis
• Permanent disability due to failure to recognise symptoms of Cauda Equina Syndrome