Cambridge professor accused of failing IQ tests to boost £1m NHS stroke claim

A Cambridge academic has been accused of deliberately underperforming on IQ and memory tests to strengthen a £1 million compensation claim against the NHS for alleged failings in stroke care.

Dr Mohamed Atef Hakmi, 64, an orthopaedic surgeon and affiliated assistant professor at Cambridge University, is suing the NHS, claiming a delayed diagnosis of a second stroke in November 2016 left him with lasting brain damage and forced him to give up surgery.

London’s High Court heard that Dr Hakmi, a fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, scored just 84 in a pre-trial IQ test—described in court as a “very bad” result—despite continuing to teach at one of the world’s most prestigious universities.

He first suffered a stroke in September 2016, which was successfully treated with thrombolysis. He returned to the operating theatre within weeks.

But when he suffered a second stroke two months later, he says he was wrongly denied the same treatment.

His barrister, Robert Kellar KC, told the court that Dr Hakmi noticed symptoms while working late at night.

When they reappeared in the early hours, he went to Lister Hospital in Stevenage, having phoned ahead to say he believed he was having a stroke.

At hospital, he was assessed by an A&E doctor and then over the phone by a remote stroke consultant as part of the NHS Telemedicine system.

He was told he was “not having a stroke,” and alternative explanations such as migraine or epilepsy were suggested.

It was not until 9am that the stroke was formally diagnosed—too late for thrombolysis to be effective.

Dr Hakmi alleges that “cumulative and inter-related” NHS failures, including a “cursory and sub-standard examination” and the inability to consult with a stroke specialist face-to-face due to the telemedicine system malfunctioning, led to avoidable harm.

Kellar said Dr Hakmi was left with permanent disabilities, including a limp, reduced sensation in his fingers and toes, fatigue in his right arm and hand, and cognitive issues such as memory loss, impaired concentration, and slower processing speed.

“His confidence is low, and he is experiencing significant depressive symptoms due to physical, cognitive, speech, and language issues resulting from his second stroke, which are negatively affecting important aspects of his life,” Kellar told the court.

Dr Hakmi no longer performs surgery or maintains a private practice, but has returned to restricted NHS duties.

Kellar argued that if not for the alleged negligence, he would likely have made a good recovery and resumed all surgical duties that did not require fine motor skills.

NHS barrister John de Bono KC denied that Dr Hakmi is entitled to compensation, accusing him of exaggerating symptoms during assessments.

As well as the low IQ score, de Bono said memory test results were “astonishing,” with scores placing Dr Hakmi below 99 per cent of the population.

Dr Hakmi was reportedly unable to recall more than four single-digit numbers in a row, despite his continued academic role.

“You scored astonishingly badly for someone operating at the level you are describing this morning,” de Bono said, referencing Dr Hakmi’s ongoing teaching role.

He suggested Dr Hakmi’s “sense of injustice” might have motivated him to underperform in tests to emphasise the stroke’s impact.

“One possibility which I put to you is that you were deliberately underperforming,” he said.

Dr Hakmi denied the accusation, describing the testing environment as “exhausting” and “not organised.”

“I definitely have a memory problem, slow effort,” he told the court.

“I have done everything to mitigate my losses. I know definitely I’m not as before I had the stroke.”

When de Bono referred to a test result “very nearly at chance level,” suggesting even random answers would have performed better, Dr Hakmi replied: “I have been straightforward in everything in my life. I have aimed to be a surgeon again, but I have failed.”

The claim is against East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, which runs Lister Hospital, and Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, where the remote consultant was based.

Both trusts deny liability, insisting Dr Hakmi was at all times treated with reasonable care and skill by competent clinicians.

They maintain he was not suitable for thrombolysis because his symptoms were not severe enough and treatment would have come too late.