G & M v Armellin

In the case of G & M v Armellin, the plaintiffs sought compensation for the birth of twins resulting from an in vitro fertilisation (IVF) procedure, claiming that the defendant breached their duty of care by transferring two embryos instead of one as requested. The plaintiffs argued that the defendant's actions caused them to suffer damages, including the costs of raising two children rather than one. The legal issues before the court involved whether the defendant was negligent in transferring two embryos, whether the plaintiffs' decisions not to abort or reduce the embryos contributed to the damages, and the scope of damages for the wrongful birth.

The court determined that the defendant did not breach their duty of care in transferring two embryos, as the plaintiffs had not established that the defendant acted negligently. The court found that the plaintiffs' decisions not to abort or reduce the embryos were reasonable and did not constitute a failure to mitigate their losses. Consequently, the plaintiffs' claim for damages was assessed considering their contributory negligence. The court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to damages for the exacerbation of pregnancy symptoms, economic loss, and out-of-pocket expenses related to raising two children. However, the court ruled that the cost of supporting the children through university was not compensable.

Additionally, the court addressed procedural issues, including a concession made and later withdrawn by the defendant's counsel, and the suppression of the plaintiffs' and children's names from publication. The court decided that the concession could be withdrawn as it was made before the defendant's submissions were complete, and the interests of justice permitted the withdrawal. Regarding the suppression order, the court determined that the administration of justice did not require the suppression of the plaintiffs' names but ordered the suppression of the children's names indefinitely.

The final orders of the court dismissed the application for damages, ordered the plaintiffs to pay the defendant's costs, vacated the previous suppression order regarding the plaintiffs' names, and suppressed the names of the plaintiffs' children from publication indefinitely, with a stay on vacating the suppression order regarding the plaintiffs' names for 28 days.