Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

MEDICAL TREATMENT: L v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and Secretary of State for Health

Sep 29, 2018, 17:11 PM
Slug : l-v-human-fertilisation-and-embryology-authority-and-secretary-of-state-for-health
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 3, 2008, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87283

(Family Division; Charles J; 3 October 2008)

The deceased husband's sperm, having been retrieved by the wife on the basis of a court order, would be preserved pending a final decision on the possible export of such sperm for the purpose of fertility treatment for the wife under the discretion given to the Human Fertility and Embryology Agency by Human Fertility and Embryology Act 1990, s 24(4). The storage of the gametes for use in the UK was not possible because there had been no effective consent by the husband, who had died unexpectedly; the need for effective consent to storage in the UK for subsequent use in the UK was not incompatible with the wife's rights under European Convention on Human Rights. The court expressed preliminary views on a number of questions relating to the possible exercise of the discretion to allow export of the gametes, in particular suggesting that the Agency could consider and grant a special direction that permitted storage and export of gametes prior to retrieval, although it would rarely do so if effective consent to such storage and use had not been given, but that otherwise it was not possibly lawfully to remove or authorise the removal of gametes from a dead person who had not given an effective advanced consent to this.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from