‘Rachel Marcus and Marcus Coates-Walker of 1 Crown Office Row join Lucy McCann to explore the principle of the scope of duty in the context of clinical negligence claims. First by analysing the decision in Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 and then discussing how the courts have grappled with scope of duty issues since.’
Law Pod UK, 25th January 2024
Source: audioboom.com
‘In Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21 the Supreme Court has revisited the principles to be applied in “wrongful birth” claims: claims for the cost of bringing up a disabled child who would not have been born but for a doctor’s negligent medical advice/treatment. However, the judgment has implications beyond the world of clinical negligence litigation. The Supreme Court has taken the opportunity to clarify the components or ingredients of the tort of negligence more generally. In particular, the court has affirmed the importance of the “scope of duty” principle: a principle which limits the recoverability of damages wherever it applies.’
Quarterly Medical Law Review, 28th July 2021
Source: 1corqmlr.com
‘In Evie Toombes v. Dr. Philip Mitchell [2020] EWHC 3506 the High Court has given renewed consideration to claims for, so called, “wrongful life”. Can a disabled person ever claim damages on the basis that they would not have been born but for the defendant’s negligence? The Court answered that question with a resounding “yes”.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 21st January 2021
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Legal policy in the UK has traditionally prohibited the granting of damages for the wrongful conception or birth of a child in cases of negligence. In this case the Court of Appeal has confirmed that this bar is equally applicable to a wrongful birth arising from a breach of contract.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 10th January 2019
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Khan v MNX [2017] EWHC 2990 (QB). The Court of Appeal has held that a mother who consults a doctor in order to avoid the birth of a child with one disability may not recover damages for the costs associated with a different disability.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th November 2018
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Can a mother who consults a doctor with a view to avoiding the birth of a child with one disability recover damages for the costs associated with another disability?’
UK Human Rights Blog, 28th November 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The law on recovery for damages in wrongful birth and wrongful conception cases has been settled for some time; since the cases of McFarlane v Tayside Board of Health [2000] 2 AC 59, Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 530 and Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2002] EWCA Civ 88 there has been little, if any, disruption to the status quo. It is clear however that there do remain some unanswered questions regarding the limits of recovery in this area; one such query arose in the more recent case of Whitehead v Searle [2008] EWCA Civ 285, where the rights of a father in these actions was considered.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 8th April 2016
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Rupert Parsons’ mother is claiming £1.5 million in interim compensation for ‘wrongful birth’ on the grounds that the hospital should have picked up on his ‘severe, profound and multiple disabilities’ before the 20th week of her pregnancy.”
Daily Telegraph, 16th July 2009
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Whitehead and Another v Hibbert Pownall & Newton (a Firm)
Court of Appeal
“Where solicitors had negligently failed to prosecute a claim for damages for clinical negligence on behalf of a mother in respect of future losses for a wrongful birth, those losses were curtailed by the death of the mother; the solicitors were not liable in a subsequent claim for professional negligence brought on behalf of the mother’s estate for what amounted to a windfall in that, had her claim been brought to a successful conclusion before her death, the recoverable damages would have not have been curtailed by her death but would have extended to cover the costs of care into the future.”
The Times, 14th May 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
© Inner Temple Library 2024