header-logo header-logo

23 June 2016
Issue: 7704 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Narcolepsy drug wrongly refused

The High Court has overturned NHS England’s decision to refuse funding for a drug used to treat narcolepsy.

Ruling in R (on the application of S (a child) By her father and litigation friend M v NHS England [2016] EWHC 1395 (Admin), Mr Justice Collins held that the claimant suffered from a rare form of her condition and her circumstances were “exceptional”. He made an interim order that NHS England fund the provision of the drug, sodium oxybate (brand name Xyrem), for a trial period of three months.

The claimant is a 17-year-old woman with narcolepsy and cataplexy (temporary involuntary weakening of the muscles in response to strong emotions, such as laughter).

Delivering his judgment, Collins J emphasised that there was “no suggestion that any of those involved in the decisions lacked compassion or knowingly refused treatment they should have permitted. The difficulties facing them cannot be underestimated…Nonetheless, I am satisfied that this is a very rare case in which the decision making has gone wrong”.

Issue: 7704 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll