The integration of whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing into clinical care in the United Kingdom has created significant legal challenges for healthcare professionals. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the current legal framework governing the management of genomic incidental findings (IFs). It examines the clinician's duty of care, which has evolved beyond the traditional patient-centric model to encompass novel, albeit limited, duties to patients' biological relatives. Through a critical review of landmark case law, including the seminal judgments in ABC v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust and Khan v Meadows , the authors elucidate the modern standards for clinical negligence.

The paper analyses how the legal tests for breach of duty, causation, and recoverable harm have been reshaped, moving from a focus on the outcome of a clinical decision to the procedural correctness of the decision-making process itself. Furthermore, we explore the complex interplay between the common law duty of care and statutory obligations under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the duty of candour.

The analysis concludes that while the law is gradually providing greater clarity, it has placed significant new responsibilities upon clinicians and healthcare institutions to engage in robust, documented, and balanced decision-making to navigate the uncertain legal terrain of clinical genomics.