Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:17:56Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:17:56Z
dc.date.created 2014-06-09 en
dc.identifier.citation [2014] ZACC 34
dc.identifier.citation 2015 (2) BCLR 127 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2015 (2) SA 193 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3757
dc.title H v Fetal Assessment Centre en
dc.title.alternative CCT74/14 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT74/14 en
dc.contributor.judge Froneman J
dc.date.judgment 11 December 2014
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3757/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%28404%20Kb%29-22487.pdf?sequence=10&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Section 28(2) of the Constitution — child’s best interests must be considered in determining whether to allow the child to claim compensation for a life with disability in “wrongful life” cases Section 39(1) of the Constitution — may consider foreign law in interpreting the Bill of Rights Section 39(2) of the Constitution — development of the common law — High Court incorrectly dismissed claim on the basis of the exception Complex factual and legal considerations — inappropriate to make a final determination on the viability of the child’s claim on the record — High Court must make the determination after considering the elements of the law of delict. Application for leave to appeal concerning the existence of a claim by a child for damages against medical experts in cases of pre-natal misdiagnosis of congenital disabilities (wrongful life). The Court held that the parties’ papers did not address the constitutional injunction that a child’s best interests are of paramount importance in any matter concerning the child, which is essential to determining whether a child’s claim may exist. Whether a child’s claim may be recognised involves complex factual and legal considerations which this Court was not best placed to evaluate as this was brought on appeal against an exception. After considering foreign law and delictual implications, the Court emphasised that a child’s claim in this context may, in principle, exist. However, the High Court must still determine whether all the elements of a delict have been established, or whether a claim in another form may have to be developed to remedy any wrong that may have been committed. The Court upheld the appeal and replaced the High Court’s order with one granting the applicant leave to amend the particulars of claim. Judgment: Froneman J (unanimous)
dc.concourt.casehistory Application for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Cape Town High Court: H v Kingsbury Foetal Assessment Centre (Pty) Ltd (4872/2013) [2014] ZAWCHC 61 (24 April 2014).


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account