Less & Anor v Hussain (Rev 1)

Less & Anor v Hussain (Rev 1)

The claimants failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that they would have avoided conception if properly advised of all the risks. Therefore, causation was not proven and the claims fail. Even if causation had been established, the injuries suffered would have been within the scope of the defendant's duty, but damages for psychiatric injury and mental distress were not recoverable on the facts.

Parties
Claimant: Denise Less; Claimant: Michael Carter; Defendant: Sarah Hussain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Clinical Negligence / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Scope of Duty, Causation, Psychiatric Injury, Wrongful Conception, Loss of Autonomy, Damages, Secondary Victims, Mental Distress, Breach of Contract
Medical Negligence Tort Law Contract Law Scope of Duty Causation Psychiatric Injury Wrongful Conception Loss of Autonomy +4 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Denise Less

Claimant

Michael Carter

Claimant

Sarah Hussain

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Clinical Negligence / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached her duty of care in advising the claimant regarding pregnancy risks
  2. 2 Whether the claimants would have avoided conception if properly advised
  3. 3 Whether the injuries suffered were within the scope of the defendant's duty of care

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that they would have avoided conception if properly advised of all the risks. Therefore, causation was not proven and the claims fail. Even if causation had been established, the injuries suffered would have been within the scope of the defendant's duty, but damages for psychiatric injury and mental distress were not recoverable on the facts.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed