header-logo header-logo

26 June 2015
Issue: 7658 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Medicine

R (on the application of IM and another) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority [2015] EWHC 1706 (Admin), [2015] All ER (D) 152 (Jun)

The defendant Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority refused to permit the export of the claimants’ deceased daughter’s eggs to a treatment centre in New York to be fertilised and implanted in the mother. The claimants sought judicial review. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the application, held that the defendant’s decision, that the deceased’s wishes had not been sufficiently clear and informed, had been rational and it had not failed to realise or consider the full extent of its discretionary powers. Further, the claimants had had no right to use the eggs, under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

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

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins hires two talented legal directors

Switalskis—five appointments

Switalskis—five appointments

Firm expands national abuse compensation team

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

IP firm announces new partners and senior promotions across UK offices

NEWS
A High Court ruling has sent a jolt through the legal profession after a newly qualified solicitor used an internal AI tool to produce court correspondence containing a fabricated legal citation
A significant data privacy ruling has clarified what counts as valid consent under UK data protection law
Executors may be overlooking billions of pounds in estate assets hidden in forgotten investments and misplaced share certificates
Britain’s booming non-surgical cosmetics market is operating in what some critics describe as a regulatory ‘Wild West’
Family contact disputes are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of Court of Protection litigation
back-to-top-scroll