header-logo header-logo

05 October 2012 / Barbara Hewson
Issue: 7532 / Categories: Features , Professional negligence , Mental health
printer mail-detail

A consistent approach

Barbara Hewson highlights some recent trends in reproductive rights

On 28 August 2012, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) published an interesting decision on Italy’s law on artificial insemination. The case, Costa v Italy (App No 54270/10), is striking: first, because it is a unanimous ruling in a sensitive area and, second, because of its trenchant distinction between the status of a “child” and an “embryo”.

The applicants are a couple who are healthy carriers of cystic fibrosis. They first discovered their status, after they had a daughter in 2006, who was diagnosed with the disease. Understandably, the couple were anxious to avoid having further children similarly afflicted. When Ms Costa became pregnant again in 2012, she underwent antenatal screening and the baby was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. The couple decided to terminate that pregnancy. They then sought to have a baby by “in vitro fertilisation” (IVF), but wanted to have the embryo genetically screened prior to implantation. This is called “pre-implantation diagnosis” (PID).

Interference

Italian law prohibits PID,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll