Schumann & Anor v Wasbrough

Schumann & Anor v Wasbrough

The claims are statute barred because the claimants had actual knowledge of the relevant facts and damage in August 2001, and section 14A of the Limitation Act does not extend time. No contractual or tortious duty was owed to Mr Schumann as he was not a client, nor was there assumption of responsibility or justification for imposing a duty. There was no breach of duty by Veale Wasbrough or Karen Rea as their conduct and questioning of experts met professional standards.

Parties
Claimant: Joanne Chinnock; Claimant: Paul Alfred Schumann; Defendant: Veale Wasbrough; Defendant: Karen Rea
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence / Preliminary Issues Judgment
Outcome
claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Statute of Limitations, Duty of Care, Breach of Duty, Wrongful Birth, Retainer, Assumption of Responsibility
Professional Negligence Medical Law Limitation Law Statute of Limitations Duty of Care Breach of Duty Wrongful Birth Retainer +1 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joanne Chinnock

Claimant

Paul Alfred Schumann

Claimant

Veale Wasbrough

Defendant

Karen Rea

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence / Preliminary Issues Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims against Veale Wasbrough and Karen Rea are statute barred
  2. 2 Whether any contractual or tortious duties were owed by Veale Wasbrough or Karen Rea to Paul Schumann
  3. 3 Whether either Veale Wasbrough or Karen Rea acted in breach of duties owed to Joanne Chinnock or Paul Schumann

Ratio Decidendi

The claims are statute barred because the claimants had actual knowledge of the relevant facts and damage in August 2001, and section 14A of the Limitation Act does not extend time. No contractual or tortious duty was owed to Mr Schumann as he was not a client, nor was there assumption of responsibility or justification for imposing a duty. There was no breach of duty by Veale Wasbrough or Karen Rea as their conduct and questioning of experts met professional standards.

Court Disposition

claims dismissed

Orders

  • Claims against Veale Wasbrough and Karen Rea are dismissed