Root Canal and Restorative Dentistry Claims
Root canal treatment, crowns, fillings and extractions can go wrong without negligence, but a claim may succeed where the dentist fell below a reasonable standard: extracting the wrong tooth, leaving infection untreated, mis-planning treatment or failing to obtain proper consent.
Common Allegations
Claims in this area commonly involve:
- Removing the wrong tooth or a tooth that did not need removing
- Root canal treatment that missed canals, was poorly sealed or left infection
- Crowns and fillings placed on unhealthy teeth without proper planning
- Failing to take X-rays or to act on findings
- Failing to refer for specialist treatment when it was needed
Complication or Breach?
Direct Answer: A recognised complication of well-performed treatment is not negligent, but a dentist who fails to recognise a problem, respond properly or explain the risk in advance may be.
For example, a file breaking inside a canal can happen even with good technique; what matters is whether the dentist told you, managed it properly and referred where appropriate. An independent dental expert compares the care given with what a reasonably competent dentist would have done.
Compensation
Compensation covers pain and suffering, the cost of further treatment to put things right, and financial losses. Where treatment was privately paid for, a refund is not automatic, but the cost of remedial treatment made necessary by the negligence is claimable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I claim if the wrong tooth was extracted?
Is a broken instrument during a root canal negligence?
What if my root canal became infected?
Can I claim for NHS dental treatment?
What do I have to prove in a dental negligence claim?
How long do I have to bring a dental negligence claim?
Can I bring a dental negligence claim on a no win no fee basis?
You May Also Be Interested In
Dental Negligence
The full dental negligence overview
Read moreNerve Damage After Dental Treatment
Lingual and inferior alveolar nerve injuries
Read moreDental Implant Negligence Claims
Failed or badly placed implants
Read moreMissed Oral Cancer & Gum Disease Claims
Failure to diagnose or refer
Read moreWhat Is No Win No Fee?
How CFAs work in England and Wales
Read moreWhere this applies: This page covers England and Wales. The rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland are different.
Sources for this page
Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 18 September 2026.
- Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s.58 (conditional fee agreements)
The provision that makes CFAs lawful and enforceable. CFAs derive from this section, not from LASPO.
- Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2013, arts. 4–5 · in force from 1 April 2013
Art. 4 caps the success fee at 100% of base costs. Art. 5 caps what may be taken from damages in personal injury at 25% of PSLA plus past pecuniary loss, net of CRU, at first instance.
- Civil Procedure Rules, Part 44 (incl. rr.44.13–44.17, QOCS)
Qualified one-way costs shifting and its exceptions. Rule 44.14 was amended with effect from 6 April 2023.
- Limitation Act 1980, s.11 (personal injury actions)
Three years from the date of the accident or the date of knowledge. Property damage such as a damaged vehicle is a separate claim with a longer six-year period under s.2.
- Limitation Act 1980, s.14 (date of knowledge)
The three-year period can run from the 'date of knowledge': when you first knew the injury was significant and attributable to the act or omission alleged to be negligent. Central in delayed-diagnosis cases.
- Limitation Act 1980, s.28 (extension for disability)
Time does not run while a person is a child or lacks capacity to conduct proceedings. For a child's personal injury claim the three years generally starts on their 18th birthday.
- Limitation Act 1980, s.33 (discretionary exclusion of time limit)
A court can allow a personal injury claim to proceed out of time where it is equitable to do so. It is a discretion, not a right, and should not be relied on.
- Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11
Doctors must take reasonable care to ensure a patient is aware of any material risks of a recommended treatment and of reasonable alternatives. Consent is judged from the patient's perspective, not by what a responsible body of doctors would disclose (the Bolam test).
- General Dental Council — Standards for the Dental Team
The GDC's standards for all dental professionals, including consent, record keeping, treatment planning, communication and candour. Failing them is evidence relevant to negligence, not the legal test itself.
- Dental Complaints Service
Free service run by the GDC that helps patients resolve complaints about private dental care. NHS dental complaints go to the practice, NHS England and the Ombudsman. A complaint does not stop the limitation clock for a legal claim.
Who wrote and checked this page
- Written and published by
- Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
- Legal review
- Checked for England & Wales by Edward & Amaury Solicitors — Solicitors regulated by the SRA (no. 800525) (verify on the regulator’s register).Review is recorded against the firm. The individual reviewer is not named on this page.
- Review dates
- Last reviewed 18 September 2026. Next review due 18 March 2027.
Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.