Mr Brudenell said the man was claiming damages for “distress and humiliation”, damages to cover the amount he had paid in maintenance, and compensation for loss of earnings. He said the man’s work had suffered and his income dropped because he was “shattered”. The court was told that the couple’s marriage had been in difficulty around the time the woman had IVF treatment and they had drawn up an agreement under which he would not have the “normal” financial responsibility for any child, but it seemed the agreement “upset” the woman.