SA,
What these materials seems to say is that there is a legal duty to disclose HIV status where there is a significant risk of infection to the partner. There is a suggestion from the Cuerrier case, although it is not clear, that there might not be a legal duty to disclose HIV status if a condom is used as there is no serious or significant risk of infection. Which is what I suspected the law might be.
This of course refutes some of what has already been discussed in this thread.
What these materials seems to say is that there is a legal duty to disclose HIV status where there is a significant risk of infection to the partner. There is a suggestion from the Cuerrier case, although it is not clear, that there might not be a legal duty to disclose HIV status if a condom is used as there is no serious or significant risk of infection. Which is what I suspected the law might be.
This of course refutes some of what has already been discussed in this thread.
Last edited: