Parenthood, Childhood and Injury: Some Dilemmas for the Law of Torts

Abstract

This paper looks at some recent developments in the law of torts. It looks in particular at the emergence of civil claims with respect to child abuse and the confinements effected by traditional limitation periods in relation to those claims. It examines in particular in the first section the House of Lords decision in Stubbings v. Webb to the effect that civil claims over child sex abuse were time barred, and the subsequent unsuccessful appeal to the European Court of Human Rights which ruled by seven votes to two that there had been no violation of articles 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is also noted that the Court ruled unanimously that there had been no violation of article 8; and by eight votes to one that there had been no violation of article 14. The paper turns in the second section to what have been called actions for ‘wrongful birth’, arguing that here we see the law of torts taking a more protective role, one which must be set side by side with the child abuse actions examined in the first part of the paper. Throughout the paper, both English and Australian law is canvassed. The major claims in this paper relate to what the author terms a singularly adult picture or rights and wrongs reflected in the law of torts.