Khan v Meadows

Khan v Meadows

The medical practitioner's duty was limited to advising on the risk of haemophilia; liability does not extend to unrelated disabilities such as autism, as those risks were not within the scope of the duty undertaken.

Parties
Respondent: Khan; Appellant: Meadows
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Scope of Duty, Clinical Negligence, Wrongful Birth, Damages, Remoteness, Causation
Tort Law Medical Negligence Scope of Duty Clinical Negligence Wrongful Birth Damages Remoteness 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan

Respondent

Meadows

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a medical practitioner is liable in negligence for the costs of raising a child with both a hereditary disease and an unrelated disability, or only for costs associated with the hereditary disease
  2. 2 How the scope of duty principle (SAAMCO) applies in clinical negligence cases

Ratio Decidendi

The medical practitioner's duty was limited to advising on the risk of haemophilia; liability does not extend to unrelated disabilities such as autism, as those risks were not within the scope of the duty undertaken.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Respondent liable only for costs associated with haemophilia; not liable for costs associated with autism.
  • Award of damages limited to £1.4m for haemophilia-related costs.