header-logo header-logo

Vaccination at the Court of Appeal

01 April 2020
Categories: Legal News , Child law
printer mail-detail
The Court of Appeal is currently considering an important case on a parent’s right to refuse vaccination for their child

The case concerns a local authority’s powers under s 33(3) of the Children Act 1989 to consent to vaccination for children subject to care orders. The parents did not register their newborn son’s birth and later decided against him getting vaccinated. Tower Hamlets council arranged, as the boy’s ‘institutional parent’ for him to be vaccinated. Mr Justice Hayden found in favour of the council, in London Borough of Tower Hamlets v F, M and T (a child) [2020] EWHC 220 (Fam).

Barrister Chris Barnes, of 4PB, who is representing Tower Hamlets in the appeal, said: ‘This is an important opportunity for the Court of Appeal to consider vaccination and the ambit of a local authority’s power to consent to vaccination for children in their care.

‘In light of the clear scientific consensus on the safety and efficacy of vaccination it will be interesting to see whether the Court of Appeal considers that vaccination remains a sufficiently “grave” question now, in 2020, to require court oversight where parents object, which can place significant burdens on local authorities right across the country.

‘The appeal could not be more timely in light of falling rates of vaccination, the rise of the “anti-vax” movement, and, of course, the current global health emergency. Whatever the Court decides it will lay down an important marker on an issue that generates considerable public debate.’

Categories: Legal News , Child law
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—Tim Foley

Winckworth Sherwood—Tim Foley

Property litigation practice strengthened by partner hire

Kingsley Napley—Romilly Holland

Kingsley Napley—Romilly Holland

International arbitration team specialist joins the team

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
back-to-top-scroll