Khan v Meadows [2021] UKSC 21

Facts

  • Ms. Meadows consulted her general practitioner, Dr. Khan, seeking to determine if she was a carrier of the haemophilia gene, a hereditary condition.
  • Dr. Khan negligently advised Ms. Meadows that she was not a carrier, relying on a test that only confirmed Ms. Meadows herself did not have haemophilia.
  • Relying on the incorrect advice, Ms. Meadows gave birth to a son who had both haemophilia and autism, though autism was unrelated to the genetic risk at issue.
  • Ms. Meadows sought compensation for the costs associated with both haemophilia and autism.
  • The Court of Appeal, applying the SAAMCO principle, held Dr. Khan liable only for the costs related to haemophilia.
  • The Supreme Court was asked to determine the correct scope of Dr. Khan’s liability for the losses suffered.

Issues

  1. Whether Dr. Khan’s duty of care extended to both haemophilia and autism-related losses, or only to losses stemming from haemophilia.
  2. What framework should be applied to determine the proper scope of duty in professional negligence cases.
  3. Whether existing principles, such as the advice/information distinction in SAAMCO, remain adequate or require revision.

Decision

  • The Supreme Court reaffirmed that Dr. Khan was liable only for damages relating to her breach concerning haemophilia risk, not for losses associated with autism.
  • The Court introduced a six-question framework for analyzing the scope of duty in negligence cases, emphasizing that liability is limited to harms within the purpose of the duty owed.
  • The judgment clarified that professional liability requires a direct connection between the risk envisaged by the duty and the loss suffered.
  • The majority judgment departed from rigid adherence to the SAAMCO distinction between "advice" and "information," focusing instead on the purpose and scope of the duty undertaken.

Legal Principles

  • The scope of duty in negligence is determined by examining the specific risks against which the defendant undertook to protect the claimant.
  • The six-question framework provides a methodical approach to establishing whether harm is actionable, within the scope of duty, caused by breach, sufficiently connected to the subject-matter of the duty, and not excluded by remoteness or other legal principles.
  • Liability in professional negligence is limited to losses falling within the specific purpose of the advice or service undertaken.
  • Competing approaches (e.g., Lord Burrows’ seven-question model and Lord Leggatt’s focus on causation and counterfactual analysis) were acknowledged but not adopted as the primary framework.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court in Khan v Meadows established a structured six-question framework for identifying the scope of duty in negligence, holding that professionals are only liable for losses within the purpose of their assumed duty, and confirmed Dr. Khan’s liability was limited to losses associated with the haemophilia risk.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal