Loss of consortium is a term used in the law of torts that refers to the deprivation of the benefits of a family relationship due to injuries caused by a tortfeasor.
The action was originally expressed in the Latin phrase "per quod servitium et consortium amisit" ("in consequence of which he lost [another person's] servitude and marital services").
[2] Actions for loss of consortium were abolished in England and Wales and Northern Ireland by the Administration of Justice Act 1982 (UK) s. 2.
In an English case, Baker v. Bolton (1808) 1 Camp 493, Lord Ellenborough made a much disputed, and unsupported, statement that an action for loss of consortium will not lie when the act, omission, or negligence in question results in the wife's death.
Similarly, a claim for loss of consortium will not lie where the husband and wife's marital bond has been severed by divorce (Parker v Dzundza [1979] Qd R 55).
This action, in its common law form, has been labelled by Australian High Court Justice Murphy as an "archaic view" of interpersonal relationships due to the proprietary and misogynist undertones.
Other jurisdictions view loss of consortium as an element of damages, not as an independent cause of action; in which case the claim must be brought under another tort.