Premium
Medical consultation — contract versus tort?
Author(s) -
Gerber Paul
Publication year - 1985
Publication title -
medical journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.904
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1326-5377
pISSN - 0025-729X
DOI - 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1985.tb113281.x
Subject(s) - plaintiff , breach of contract , tort , business , law , duty of care , duty to warn , duty , medical negligence , liability , sterilization (economics) , res ipsa loquitur , medicine , damages , political science , confidentiality , finance , exchange rate , foreign exchange market
A surgeon was sued for breach of contract for a failed sterilization, resulting in an unwanted pregnancy. It was conceded that the operation was carried out skilfully and with due care. The major ground relied on was that, whilst there may be no common law duty to warn of the small risk of spontaneous recanalization, the contract in the present case was for the male plaintiff to be sterilized, so that the failure to achieve this result constituted a breach of contract.