Khan v Meadows

Khan v Meadows

The appellant's duty was limited to advising and investigating in relation to haemophilia, not all risks of pregnancy. The loss associated with autism was not within the scope of the appellant's duty, as the risk of autism was not increased by the appellant's advice and was not the focus of the consultation. Therefore, damages for autism are not recoverable.

Parties
Appellant: Dr Hafshah Khan; Respondent: Ms Omodele Meadows
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Scope of Duty, Wrongful Birth, Damages, Causation
Medical Negligence Tort Law Scope of Duty Wrongful Birth Damages Causation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Hafshah Khan

Appellant

Ms Omodele Meadows

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's liability extends to losses associated with both haemophilia and autism or only haemophilia
  2. 2 Whether the scope of duty test (SAAMCO) limits recoverable damages to those within the purpose of the advice sought

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's duty was limited to advising and investigating in relation to haemophilia, not all risks of pregnancy. The loss associated with autism was not within the scope of the appellant's duty, as the risk of autism was not increased by the appellant's advice and was not the focus of the consultation. Therefore, damages for autism are not recoverable.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed. The appellant is not liable for losses associated with autism.