header-logo header-logo

No Roe v Wade

28 January 2011 / Barbara Hewson
Issue: 7450 / Categories: Features , Family , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Barbara Hewson considers the latest ECtHR ruling on Ireland’s abortion law

Last December, a Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights issued a landmark judgment on the sensitive topic of abortion. The case of A, B & C v Ireland (App No 25579/05) was argued on 9 December 2009, but the court spent over a year deliberating. Six out of 17 judges issued partly dissenting opinions. The majority decision is conservative: this is no Roe v Wade.

The applicants Ms A, B and C were Irish residents who had travelled to the UK for abortions. They complained that Irish law did not allow them to terminate their pregnancies lawfully in Ireland. Ms A had health and social issues: four children (one disabled), and problems with alcohol and depression. Ms B initially thought she was at risk of an ectopic pregnancy, though later it was confirmed that she did not have this condition. Ms C was Lithuanian, and in remission from a rare cancer. Before discovering she had become pregnant, she

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll