In Wilsher case, I'm curious why the materially contribution test does not be used in this case when making a claim?
I saw a question before, it mentioned that although the parents in Wilsher could not take an issue due to their baby's blindness, it is still fair as the baby is still alive although the consequence is the baby lost his eyesight due to the excessive of oxygen. However, I'm still wondering why it is fair?
Turn on thread page Beta
mesothelioma case watch
- Thread Starter
Last edited by joskersme; 09-11-2017 at 10:45. Reason: The case is in tort law and I'm hoping someone can give a hand to me to solve the problem. Many thanks.
- 09-11-2017 10:43