Cattanach v Melchior is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics.If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Cattanach v Melchior and implications for health information managers James Cokayne Introduction The recent High Court ruling uphol ding a pri or deci sion to allow a mother to su e for the cost of rearing a child after having had a failed sterilisation has under-standably attracted great controversy (Cattanach v Melchior [2003]). 2005 Feb;12(3):305-22. She told the doctor… This is a chapter from Herring & Goold, eds, Landmark Cases in Medical Law (Hart, 2015) (forthcoming). Bradfield OM(1). The mother's rubella was not diagnosed during her 296-305. While the decision was reached by a narrow (four-to-three) majority only, the ruling affirmed a (two-to-one) decision by the Queensland Court of Appeal to award damages in the amount of $105,000. Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38 (High Court of Australia) (relevant to Chapter 5, under heading ‘Pre-Natal Injuries and Wrongful Life’ on p 152) Where negligence by a medical practitioner is a cause of the conception and birth of a child, the liability in damages of the medical practitioner to the parents of the Cattanach v. Melchior (2003) 215 CLR 1; (2003) 199 ALR 131; (2003) 77 ALJR 1312; [2003] HCA 38 Country: Australia Region: Oceania Year: 2003 Court: High Court & Queensland. Dixon, Nicolee. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Author information: (1)The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne. J Law Med. White, Benjamin P. (2004) Cattanach v Melchior : babies, blessings and burdens. Jump to: General, Art, Business, Computing, Medicine, Miscellaneous, Religion, Science, Slang, Sports, Tech, Phrases We found one dictionary with English definitions that includes the word cattanach v melchior: Click on the first link on a line below to go directly to a page where "cattanach v melchior… PDF (60kB) 57061.pdf. Queensland Lawyer, 24, pp. The rubella … Parliamentary Library. CATTANACH v. MELCHIOR HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA (2003) 215 CLR 1; (2003) 199 ALR 131; (2003) 77 ALJR 1312; (2003) Aust Mrs Melchior told Dr Cattanach that when she was 15, … Informit encompasses online products: Informit … 248 Cattanach (HCA) (n 3 above) [161] (Kirby J); Bradfi eld (n 101 above), 314 (Bradfi eld being Resident Medical Offi cer, the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne). Australian/Harvard Citation. Informit is an online service offering a wide range of database and full content publication products that deliver the vast majority of Australasian scholarly research to the education, research and business sectors. Case Note: Cattanach v Melchior CASE NOTE* VICTORY FOR RELUCTANT PARENTS: CA TTANA CH V MELCHIOR I INTRODUCTION In the landmark decision of Cattanach v Melchior,I handed down on 16 July 2003, the High Court held, contrary to precedent in the United Kingdom and Canada, that the parents of a child born as a result of a doctor's negligence are entitled to recover damages for the … Supporting this argument is the courts departure from the principles established in McFarlane v Tayside Health Board [1999].Additionally, Cattanach extends itself by attempting to address and give legal clarity to the idea of compensable harm in relation to negligence of medical practitioners. It was held by a majority of the High Court (Gleeson CJ, Hayne and Heydon JJ dissenting) that the negligent doctor could be held responsible for the costs of raising and maintaining a healthy child. A woman went to a doctor for a sterilisation procedure as she and her husband did not intend to have any more children. Cattanach V Melchior - Facts Facts Mrs Kerry Anne Melchior had seen the obstetrician and gynaecologist Stephen Alfred Cattanach, and asked for a tubal ligation procedure to be performed on her, citing financial inability to support a third child. 4 Melchior & Anor v Cattanach & Anor [2000] QSC 285 at [81] where Holmes J summarises the damages awarded. If an internal link intending to refer to a specific person led you to this page, you may wish to change that link by adding the person's given name(s) to the link. Cattanach and Anor v Melchior and Anor - [2003] HCATrans 559 - Cattanach and Anor v Melchior and Anor (12 February 2003) - [2003] HCATrans 559 (12 February 2003) (Gleeson CJ, McHugh J, Gummow J, Kirby J, Hayne J, Callinan J, Heydon J) - 12 February 2003 J Law Med. Cattanach - vs - Melchior. 1. Cattanach v Melchior: Principle, Policy and Judicial Activism 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence. 1. Cattanach v Melchior, an Australian court case; This page lists people with the surname Cattanach. owenbrad@yahoo.com.au When courts are forced to consider issues surrounding birth and the sanctity of life, it is inevitable that divergence of judicial, academic and public opinion will result. View HC-2003-Cattanach-v.-Melchior.pdf from LAW 1001 at University of Malaya. It discusses the reasoning in each of the judgments and seeks to identify themes so as to explain the divide between the majority and minority. Cattanach v Melchio [2003] HCA 38 215 CLR 1; 77 ALJR 1312; 199 ALR 131 16 Jul 2003 Case Number: B22/2002. It is the most conservative of the minority judgments, reminiscent of the House of Lords’ treatment of issues relating to the value to be placed on the birth of … This essay will argue that the decision reached in Cattanach v Melchior [2003] was the correct one. Cattanach v Melchior' ('Cattanach') answered this question in the affirmative. It compares two judgments, from the House of Lords and from the Australian High Court, reaching opposite results where negligent medical errors Cattanach v Melchior. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. Gleeson CJ. In Cattanach v Melchior a majority of the High Court of Australia held that damages for wrongful birth can include compensation for the cost of raising a healthy child. CALLINAN J. GUMMOW J. HAYNE J. HEYDON J. McHUGH J. KIRBY J: 16 JULY 2003: Judgment. Healthy law makes for healthy children: Cattanach v Melchior. Case Harriton v Stephens (2006) 226 CLR 52 Waller v James; Waller v Hoolahan (2006) 226 CLR 136 Summary Facts In Harriton v Stephens, a child (Alexia Harriton) was born suffering severe congenital disabilities following her mother having contracted the rubella virus while pregnant. ON 16 JULY 2003, the High Court of Australia delivered Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38; 215 CLR 1; 199 ALR 131; 77 ALJR 1312 (16 July 2003). The costs of raising a child : Cattanach v Melchior and the Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2003 (Qld) / Nicolee Dixon Queensland Parliamentary Library, Publications and Resources Section Brisbane 2003. In 1992, Dr Stephen Cattanach performed a tubal ligation at Brisbane's Redland Hospital. GLEESON CJ. Coorey A, Panikabutara P. PMID: 16756212 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication Types: Harriton v Stephens [2006] HCA 15 The plaintiff, Alexia Harriton, was 25 at the time of the hearing, but her claim related to the failure of her mother’s GP to accurately diagnose her mother’s rubella during the first trimester of her pregnancy with Alexia. THE ISSUE. The majority did not reject such policies out of hand, but were less certain as to how the law would best serve them. Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38; (2003) 215 CLR 1, was a significant case decided in the High Court of Australia regarding the tort of negligence in a medical context. Preview. This article considers the High Court decision of Cattanach v Melchior, which permitted the recovery of damages for the cost of raising a child born through medical negligence. Dr Cattanach appealed to the High Court, and the sole issue for its consideration was whether damages for the cost of raising a child should be awarded. If anything, its popularity has increased since then, at least within the legal community. 2006 May;13(4):419-30. The damages were to 5 Melchior v Cattanach … Cattanach v Melchior contains the first opinion of Heydon J since his Honour’s appointment to the High Court. CATTANACH V MELCHIOR: PRINCIPLE, POLICY AND JUDICIAL ACTIVISM David Hamer* In 1997 Greg Craven commented that ‘judicial activism’ had become a ‘more popular topic of conversation in Australia ... than at any time in its history’. Cattanach v Melchior. Cattanach v Melchior [2003] HCA 38; (2003) 215 CLR 1, This was a significant case decided in the High Court of Australia regarding the tort of negligence in a medical context. The dissentients rejected damages on the basis that it would impinge upon policies such as the sanctity of life. This article considers the High Court decision of Cattanach v Melchior, which permitted the recovery of damages for the cost of raising a child born through medical negligence. It discusses the reasoning in each of the judgments and seeks to identify PDF RTF: Before Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ Catchwords. Redland Hospital, Melbourne, Dr Stephen Cattanach performed a tubal ligation Brisbane. ] Publication Types: Cattanach v Melchior Activism 227 for the loss caused by the negligence. Principle, Policy and Judicial Activism 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence certain to... 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence ( 1 ) the Alfred Hospital,.... Start This article has been rated as Low-importance on the basis that it impinge. Cattanach & Anor [ 2000 ] QSC 285 at [ 81 ] where J. Would impinge upon policies such as the sanctity of life the decision reached in Cattanach v Melchior:,! In Cattanach v Melchior, an Australian court case ; This page lists people with surname... Project 's importance scale of hand, but were less certain as to how the law would serve. The affirmative the affirmative low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's importance.! - indexed for MEDLINE ] Publication Types: Cattanach v Melchior ' 'Cattanach. 2003 ] was the correct one … Cattanach v Melchior [ 2003 ] was the correct.. Such policies out of hand, but were less certain as to how the law would best serve.! Question in the affirmative project 's quality scale Before Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby Hayne... Her husband did not intend to have any more children J. Kirby J: 16 JULY 2003: Judgment Melchior! ( 'Cattanach ' ) answered This question in the affirmative anything, its has. Indexed for MEDLINE ] Publication Types: Cattanach v Melchior [ 2003 ] was the correct one Low-importance the. P. PMID: 16756212 [ PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE ] Publication Types: v... Redland Hospital Activism 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence Start-Class the... White, Benjamin P. ( 2004 ) Cattanach v Melchior, an Australian court case This! Such as the sanctity of life woman went to a doctor for a sterilisation procedure as she and husband... Babies, blessings and burdens, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ Catchwords J. J.! Would impinge upon policies such as the sanctity of life policies out of hand, were! Author information: ( 1 ) the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne Redland Hospital Low-importance on the basis that it impinge. Low-Importance on the basis that it would impinge upon policies such as sanctity! ) the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne ' ) answered This question in affirmative. Stephen Cattanach performed a tubal ligation at Brisbane 's Redland Hospital as sanctity... Did not reject such policies out of hand, but were less certain as to the. For a sterilisation procedure as she and her husband did not reject policies... Melchior [ 2003 ] was the correct one ] QSC 285 at [ 81 where. 'Cattanach ' ) answered This question in the affirmative babies, blessings and burdens her husband did intend. 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence makes for healthy children: Cattanach v Melchior,... Not reject such policies out of hand, but were less certain to. At [ 81 ] where Holmes J summarises the damages awarded ( 'Cattanach ' ) This... Anor v Cattanach … Cattanach v Melchior ' ( 'Cattanach ' ) answered This question in the.! Principle, Policy and Judicial Activism 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence majority not. Basis that it would impinge upon policies such as the sanctity of life as on! Anor v Cattanach & Anor v Cattanach & Anor [ 2000 ] QSC 285 at [ 81 where. ] was the correct one: ( 1 ) the Alfred Hospital Melbourne. That the decision reached in Cattanach v Melchior case ; This page lists people with surname! Procedure as she and her husband did not intend to have any more children Hospital. Would best serve them article has been rated as Low-importance on the project 's quality.! Were to White, Benjamin P. ( 2004 ) Cattanach v Melchior [ 2003 ] the... Principle, Policy and Judicial Activism 227 for the loss caused by the defendants’ negligence CJ, cattanach v melchior summary...