Briody v St Helens and Knowlsey Area Health Authority: CA 29 Jun 2001

The appellant had claimed and been awarded damages for a negligently performed caesarean operation. She had been refused damages for the cost of later going to California to go through a commercial surrogacy procedure.
Held: Such claims were to be differentiated from payment of the costs of vitro fertilization. The chances of success were very slim, and the expenditure unreasonable. Neither the child nor the pregnancy would be hers, and in reality it was a form of adoption.

Judges:

Henry LJ, Judge LJ, Hale LJ

Citations:

Times 14-Aug-2001, Gazette 31-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1010, [2001] 2 FLR 1094, [2001] 2 FCR 481, [2002] QB 856, (2001) 62 BMLR 1, [2001] Fam Law 796, [2002] 2 WLR 394

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromMargaret Patricia Briody v St Helens and Knowlsey Heath Authority QBD 21-Jan-2000
The claimant having become unable to have children through the negligence of the Authority, claimed in damages the cost of arranging a paid surrogacy arrangement abroad. Such arrangements here were void and unenforceable, and it would be against . .

Cited by:

Appealed toMargaret Patricia Briody v St Helens and Knowlsey Heath Authority QBD 21-Jan-2000
The claimant having become unable to have children through the negligence of the Authority, claimed in damages the cost of arranging a paid surrogacy arrangement abroad. Such arrangements here were void and unenforceable, and it would be against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Family

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.136178