Search

We studied visual function in 16 patients with the Bardet-Biedl syndrome. Visual acuity, kinetic perimetry, and electroretinography results indicated a severe loss of central and peripheral vision and rod and cone function by the second or third decade of life. Light- and dark-adapted static perimetry in patients 10 to 15 years of age with early involvement showed a parallel and marked loss of rod and cone sensitivity across the visual field. Patients with more advanced disease and no measurable peripheral visual field showed different patterns of central visual dysfunction: an island of only cone function centered in a bull's-eye lesion; patches of rod function surrounding geographic atrophy; or a central island of excellent rod sensitivity but severely impaired cones. In the two least-affected patients, a 13-year-old boy and the asymptomatic 45-year-old sibling of a patient, there were more rod than cone abnormalities as determined by electroretinography and static perimetry.

Principles guiding the decision of the BGH1. If a doctor carries out a forceps delivery rather than a Caesarean section in the case of a breech presentation where the child's feet are presented, this constitutes a treatment failure if the baby is not yet fully engaged.2. If, through a treatment failure by the doctor assisting at the birth, a child suffers severe brain injury which leads to the substantial loss of its perceptive abilities, the damage to personality suffered in this way is a loss of amenity which should be compensated by means of a monetary payment.3. The extent of damage is such that an individual assessment of damage is required, and a purely symbolic payment is inadequate (reversal of BGH, 16.12.75 - VIZR 175/74 = JZ 1976, 559 and BGH, 22.6.1982 - VIZR 247/80 = NJW 1982, 2123)For the facts see the accompanying case note by Nieper.Principles guiding the decision of the Belgian Cour de cassationIn order for compensation for pain and suffering to be payable, it is not necessary for the injured party to be conscious that the sum awarded is intended to compensate for damage.FactsIn this case damages for pain and suffering were awarded to a person who had been mentally impaired since the death of their father as a result of a traffic accident.