An Alexandrian approach to the knotty problem of wrongful pregnancy: Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust in the House of Lords

Alasdair Maclean

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    In this commentary, I examine the House of Lords judgment in Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52; [2004] 1 A.C. 309. I briefly summarise the facts and judgments and then consider the implications both for wrongful pregnancy case law and suggest that the decision leaves open to challenge the Court of Appeal decision in Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 530; [2001] 3 All ER 97. I also suggest that, although not sufficiently justified by the majority, their decision to award a conventional sum is justifiable. I also consider the two more general issues that arise from the case. I briefly note the unexplicated distinction their Lordships draw between legal and social policy. I also consider the role that distributive justice has played in the continuing saga of wrongful pregnancy case law.
    Original languageEnglish
    JournalWeb Journal of Current Legal Issues
    Volume3
    Publication statusPublished - 2004

    Fingerprint

    memorial
    pregnancy
    case law
    legal policy
    distributive justice
    appeal

    Keywords

    • Clinical negligence
    • Disabled persons
    • Measure of damages
    • Sterilisation
    • Wrongful birth

    Cite this

    @article{b9e9f724007c47b1beac788a622ab17b,
    title = "An Alexandrian approach to the knotty problem of wrongful pregnancy: Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust in the House of Lords",
    abstract = "In this commentary, I examine the House of Lords judgment in Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52; [2004] 1 A.C. 309. I briefly summarise the facts and judgments and then consider the implications both for wrongful pregnancy case law and suggest that the decision leaves open to challenge the Court of Appeal decision in Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 530; [2001] 3 All ER 97. I also suggest that, although not sufficiently justified by the majority, their decision to award a conventional sum is justifiable. I also consider the two more general issues that arise from the case. I briefly note the unexplicated distinction their Lordships draw between legal and social policy. I also consider the role that distributive justice has played in the continuing saga of wrongful pregnancy case law.",
    keywords = "Clinical negligence, Disabled persons, Measure of damages, Sterilisation, Wrongful birth",
    author = "Alasdair Maclean",
    note = "dc.publisher: Web Journal of Current Legal Issues",
    year = "2004",
    language = "English",
    volume = "3",
    journal = "Web Journal of Current Legal Issues",
    issn = "1360-1326",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - An Alexandrian approach to the knotty problem of wrongful pregnancy: Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust in the House of Lords

    AU - Maclean, Alasdair

    N1 - dc.publisher: Web Journal of Current Legal Issues

    PY - 2004

    Y1 - 2004

    N2 - In this commentary, I examine the House of Lords judgment in Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52; [2004] 1 A.C. 309. I briefly summarise the facts and judgments and then consider the implications both for wrongful pregnancy case law and suggest that the decision leaves open to challenge the Court of Appeal decision in Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 530; [2001] 3 All ER 97. I also suggest that, although not sufficiently justified by the majority, their decision to award a conventional sum is justifiable. I also consider the two more general issues that arise from the case. I briefly note the unexplicated distinction their Lordships draw between legal and social policy. I also consider the role that distributive justice has played in the continuing saga of wrongful pregnancy case law.

    AB - In this commentary, I examine the House of Lords judgment in Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52; [2004] 1 A.C. 309. I briefly summarise the facts and judgments and then consider the implications both for wrongful pregnancy case law and suggest that the decision leaves open to challenge the Court of Appeal decision in Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust [2001] EWCA Civ 530; [2001] 3 All ER 97. I also suggest that, although not sufficiently justified by the majority, their decision to award a conventional sum is justifiable. I also consider the two more general issues that arise from the case. I briefly note the unexplicated distinction their Lordships draw between legal and social policy. I also consider the role that distributive justice has played in the continuing saga of wrongful pregnancy case law.

    KW - Clinical negligence

    KW - Disabled persons

    KW - Measure of damages

    KW - Sterilisation

    KW - Wrongful birth

    M3 - Article

    VL - 3

    JO - Web Journal of Current Legal Issues

    JF - Web Journal of Current Legal Issues

    SN - 1360-1326

    ER -