A Turn-up Down Under: McFarlane in the Light of Cattanach

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dspace.mediu.edu.my:8181/xmlui/handle/123456789/5994

Full metadata record

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.creator	J K Mason	-
dc.date	2004	-
dc.date.accessioned	2013-05-30T13:59:47Z	-
dc.date.available	2013-05-30T13:59:47Z	-
dc.date.issued	2013-05-30	-
dc.identifier	http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrb/script-ed/docs/mason.asp	-
dc.identifier	http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=openurl&genre=article&issn=17442567&date=2004&volume=1&issue=1&spage=119	-
dc.identifier.uri	http://koha.mediu.edu.my:8181/jspui/handle/123456789/5994	-
dc.description	The current position as to recovery of damages for the upkeep of a healthy child born as the result of a negligent sterilisation has been disturbed by the decision of the High Court of Australia in Cattanach v Melchior. The High Court rejected the recent ruling of the House of Lords in McFarlane v Tayside Health Board and decided in favour of recovery by a majority of 4:3. This paper reviews the antecedent litigation and analyses the conflicting opinions of the seven-judge bench in Cattanach. The likely effect on the common law within the Commonwealth is considered in anticipation of the imminent House of Lords decision in Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust.	-
dc.publisher	AHRB Research Centre for Studies in Intellectual Property and Technology Law	-
dc.source	SCRIPT-ed	-
dc.title	A Turn-up Down Under: McFarlane in the Light of Cattanach	-
Appears in Collections:	Law and Political Science

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

DSpace JSPUI