header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 April 2007
Issue: 7270 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Human rights—Embryo—Frozen stored embryos

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Evans v United Kingdom (App. No. 6339/05), [2007] All ER (D) 109 (Apr)

European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber

Judges Rozakis (President), Costa, Bratza, Zupancic, Lorenzen, Turmen, Butkevych, Vajic, Tsatsa-Nikolovska, Baka, Kovler, Zagrebelsky, Mularoni, Spielmann, Jaeger, Thor Bjorgvinsson and Ziemele, and Mr E Fribergh (Registrar)

10 April 2007

Where the issue is one of the right to respect for the decision to become a parent in the genetic sense, the margin of appreciation to be afforded to the respondent state under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) has to be a wide one.

The applicant had to have both ovaries removed, but she and her partner, J, were informed that it would be possible first to extract some eggs for in vitro fertilisation (IVF) if the procedure was carried out quickly. Both the applicant and J signed a form consenting to the IVF treatment and that, in accordance with the provisions of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (HFEA 1990), it would be possible for either to withdraw

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll