Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||The Price of Responsible Parenting?||Contributor(s):||Lunney, Mark (author)||Publication Date:||2002||Handle Link:||https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/1893||Abstract:||In 'ATH & Am v MS' the Court of Appeal was faced with the thorny problem of how to treat substituted services provided to a child one of whose parents had been killed in circumstances allowing the child a claim under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. Part of the problem arises out the amendments made to the 1976 Act by the Administration of Justice Act 1982, which introduced a new s.4 requiring the courts in assessing the value of the dependency to disregard the value of any benefits accruing to the dependant as a result of the death. At first glance, substituted caring services provided to a child dependant would seem to fall within s.4, but in 'Hay v Hughes' the Court of Appeal had held that such substituted services (in that case provided by a grandmother in place of the deceased mother) did not result from the death. Under the fatal accidents legislation as it then stood this allowed the services to be disregarded, a result which the Court of Appeal dearly thought desirable.||Publication Type:||Journal Article||Source of Publication:||King's College Law Journal, 13(2), p. 219-221||Publisher:||Hart Publishing Ltd||Place of Publication:||United Kingdom||ISSN:||0961-5768||Field of Research (FOR):||180126 Tort Law||Socio-Economic Objective (SEO):||940499 Justice and the Law not elsewhere classified||HERDC Category Description:||C5 Other Refereed Contribution to a Scholarly Journal||Other Links:||http://www.heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/kingsclj13&id=219
|Statistics to Oct 2018:||Visitors: 93
|Appears in Collections:||Journal Article|
School of Law
Files in This Item:
checked on Dec 29, 2018
Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.