header-logo header-logo

11 December 2009 / John Keown
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Dangerous guidance

John Keown believes post Purdy guidance threatens public safety & undermines justice

In R (on the application of Purdy) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2009] All ER (D) 335 (Jul) the law lords ordered the director of public prosecutions to issue guidance setting out the factors he takes into account in deciding whether it is in the public interest to prosecute assisting or encouraging suicide.

Placed in this invidious position (by a ruling which was, with respect, unsound if not unconstitutional: see NLJ, 2 October 2009, p 1340), the DPP duly drew up interim guidelines and put them out for public consultation until 16 December. The guidelines (A public consultation on the DPP’s interim policy for prosecutors on assisted suicide) need tightening in at least three respects.

First, they need to state in terms that Purdy did not change the law, that assisting suicide remains a serious offence punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment, and that Parliament has repeatedly and recently reaffirmed the blanket prohibition. This is particularly important given the misleading

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll