| Literature DB >> 29161410 |
Abstract
In ACB v Thomson Medical Pte Ltd [2017] SGCA 20 and Shaw v Kovak [2017] EWCA Civ 1028, the idea that 'lost autonomy' should be recognised as a new form of actionable damage in the tort of negligence was rejected in Singapore and England, respectively. This, it will be argued, was the correct outcome. Protecting an interest in autonomy via the tort of negligence would undermine the coherence of that tort. In ACB, however, a new, different, form of damage was recognised: loss of 'genetic affinity'. This commentary will discuss some problems that protecting an interest in 'genetic affinity' raises before critiquing the approach to assessing damages in ACB.Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29161410 DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fwx056
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Law Rev ISSN: 0967-0742 Impact factor: 1.267