ABSTRACT
In recent years a new species of litigation has arisen which the author have dubbed 'cuckold claims'. In each of the four of the cuckold cases discussed here, two each from the UK and Australia, the tort of deceit has been successfully applied at first instance to secure damages against a mother who mistakenly but genuinely believed that her child was the genetic child of their partner. The idea that men should be able to get a 'refund' on their financial contributions to a child if their paternity is disproved is one echoed in statutory provisions Act 1989; Family Law Act 1975, and is a focal point for lobbying by fathers' rights groups. Mr. Magill's social parenting was treated by the High Court not as an alternative basis for his status as 'father' but as a cost incurred by him as a result of Ms Magill's alleged deceit.
