R (On behalf of TransActual and another) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2024] EWHC 1936 (Admin) concerned the lawfulness of secondary legislation limiting the prescription, sale or supply of medicine for the purposes of puberty suppression to under-18s experiencing gender dysphoria and gender incongruence.
The medicine concerned, Gonadotrophin-Releasing Hormone Analogues (puberty blockers), was subject to a temporary government order which took effect on 3 June and expires on 2 September 2024, following a government-commissioned review by Dr Hilary Cass.
The claimants argued the order was unlawful, there was a lack of proper consultation and the Secretary of State acted irrationally in concluding there was a serious danger to health.
Dismissing the claim, however, Mrs Justice Lang said: ‘In my view, the [Secretary of State] was entitled to conclude that the Cass Review was the best and most up-to-date scientific evidence available, and further research on the effects and safety of puberty blockers for children and young people was not required.’
Lang J said the fact the Cass Review’s findings and recommendations were acted upon by NHS England and other clinical bodies ‘gave them considerable further weight’. Moreover, ‘in regard to timing, the [Secretary of State] reasonably considered that it was essential to make the order as soon as possible to protect children and young people from irresponsible prescribing of puberty blockers by EEA providers, such as GenderGP, contrary to the recommendations of the Cass Review.
‘The standard procedure [of consultation]… was estimated to take between five and six months. In my view, it was rational for the [Secretary of State] to decide that it was essential to adopt the emergency procedure to avoid serious danger… Under the emergency procedure, there is no requirement to hold a consultation procedure.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
