Watt v. Rama
![handle is hein.journals/uwatlw10 and id is 169 raw text is: RECENT CASES
WATT v. RAMA'
Negligence, Unborn Infants and the Duty of Care
Watt v. Rama is the first Australian case to raise the question whether
a child may sue for injuries received while en ventre sa mare. The
plaintiff alleged that her mother, while pregnant, had been seriously
injured in a road accident as a result of the defendant's negligent
driving. She further alleged that she herself had suffered injuries
which were the result of the accident and/or which were the result
of the injuries suffered by her mother as a result of which her mother
was unable to have a normal pregnancy and labour. The question
was raised as a pure point of law, whether on these facts, the plain-
tiff would be entitled to succeed. The Full Court of the Supreme
Court of Victoria held that she was.
The decision is quite understandable and predictable. Given the
present judicial sympathy for plaintiffs who have suffered personal
injury as a result of a defendant's negligence-particularly an insured
defendant-it would have been a matter for considerable surprise if
the decision had been otherwise. And if (as has been reported) the
case is taken to the Privy Council I am prepared to stick my neck
out so far as to suggest that there is not the least likelihood of the
decision being reversed.
The only surprising thing about the case is the heavy weather
which the judges made of the issues in question. This was, of course,
largely due to that anachronistic concept, the duty of care, with
which the Court does not (with respect) appear to have coped very
successfully.
The duty of care concept, as has often been pointed out, is nothing
more than a shorthand method of referring to those situations in which
the law imposes liability for negligence in fact, assuming causation
to be established and no special defences to arise. To say that A owes
B a duty of care in a certain situation means and means only that if
A injures B by his negligence, A will be liable to B. Thus, to ask
1 [1972] V.R. 353.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/uwatlw10&div=20&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Watt v. Rama
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most