A disabled mother sought damages for the birth of a child after a negligently performed sterilisation.
Held: The rule in McFarlane against recovery of damages for the birth of a healthy child, did not prevent an award which was intended to reflect the particular damages attributable to the difficulties of providing care with her disabilities.
Judges:
Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And, Lady Justice Hale
Citations:
Times 20-Feb-2002, Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 88, [2003] QB 20
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – MacFarlane and Another v Tayside Health Board HL 21-Oct-1999
Child born after vasectomy – Damages Limited
Despite a vasectomy, Mr MacFarlane fathered a child, and he and his wife sought damages for the cost of care and otherwise of the child. He appealed a rejection of his claim.
Held: The doctor undertakes a duty of care in regard to the . .
Cited by:
Cited – A v East Kent Community NHS Trust CA 17-Dec-2002
The claimant had become pregnant whilst placed in a mixed psychiatric ward. She claimed damages for their negligence. They responded that damages were not payable for a healthy child.
Held: The court was bound by Rees, and damages were not to . .
Appeal from – Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages.
Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Personal Injury
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167610