Blog
Why does software ownership matter? Six key legal takeaways for tech businesses
Christopher Perrin
James Bell acted for the mother of a baby who sustained an injury at birth. A separate claim is ongoing for the child and liability has been admitted.
The mother’s claim was brought as a primary victim for a psychiatric injury caused by the trauma of her daughter’s birth, where delivery was delayed due to negligence, and the injury her baby suffered. At birth her daughter was in poor condition and required immediate resuscitation followed by brain cooling.
Our client was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder following the shock of the birth. After counselling was undertaken by the mother, Kingsley Napley obtained an expert psychiatric report. Her claim included lost earnings associated with this, the cost of future therapy as well as a sum for her pain and suffering.
The Claim settled despite ground-breaking ruling in Paul & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1 which greatly limited claims for secondary victims in clinical negligence settings.
Kingsley Napley argued that the Claimant’s case was distinct to that case law and relied upon RE v Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 824 (QB).
As the negligent acts took place before the birth of the Claimant’s daughter our case was that mother and baby were, as stated in Calderdale, “not a separate legal entity…and in law, they are to be treated as one.”
The facts of Calderdale and the Kingsley Napley case were similar in that, as in Calderdale;
“The delayed delivery triggered the commencement of the hypoxic event whilst she was still in utero….The extent of the injury was dependent upon the totality of the insult which began at the time that the Second Claimant [i.e. the mother] and RE were a single legal entity.”
As per Calderdale we argued that the mother was a primary victim. As such, the recovery for psychiatric injury should be in accordance with the principles in Page v Smith… and not subject to the control mechanisms applicable to the claims by secondary victims in cases such as Wolverhampton v. Paul. We successfully argued the mother was a primary victim and the claim settled for £35,000.
James Bell has been exemplary in looking after our case. He has struck the perfect balance for us in pursuing our claim in a delicate and supportive manner. We are very grateful to him for all his guidance and care. I would happily recommend him to friends and family if ever needed."
A client