Mr lr x dating to relating

In regard to argument, I directed that counsel file concise heads not exceeding 50 pages in length so that I could obtain a clear view of their final positions on the main issues. An already lengthy judgment would be further extended if I were to identify and respond to all the arguments.I indicated that they were at liberty to file supplementary long heads or appendices. I have, however, read all the submissions and endeavoured to ensure that my judgment addresses the main contentions.In December 2010 his parents issued summons against the defendant alleging negligent failure to diagnose and treat the jaundice timeously.They claimed damages for themselves and on behalf of IDT. The present judgment is concerned with quantum only.He was readmitted to the hospital on 16 January 2009.By the time he was discharged on 22 January 2009 he had suffered irreversible brain damage, resulting in athetoid cerebral palsy (‘CP’).The Centre for Child Law (‘CCL’), which was admitted as an amicus curiae in respect of the trust issues, was represented during argument by Mr Dutton leading Ms Campbell.

There is some question as to whether IDT should be classified as a MACS III or IV, which depends on whether one considers that he can handle most, or only selected, objects in his ordinary environment.

The plaintiffs are the parents of IDT who was born at Mowbray Maternity Hospital on 12 January 2009.

After mother and child were discharged following an uneventful birth, IDT began to exhibit signs of jaundice.

Some were agreed in a specified amount, others on the basis of formulas with the determination of the final amounts to await my finding of IDT’s life expectancy. The sufferer is unable to isolate the muscles required for a desired activity. IDT, now a boy of seven, can sit unaided but with less stability than an unimpaired child.

He can get from the floor or a chair to a standing position.

This affects the volume and coherence of perceived sound, which may fluctuate from moment to moment.