Kenward & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions & Anor[2015] EWHC 3508 (Admin) (04 December 2015)

Kenward & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions & Anor[2015] EWHC 3508 (Admin) (04 December 2015)

The October 2014 amendment to the DPP's policy was a lawful clarification of the intended meaning of the relevant factor regarding healthcare professionals and carers, not a substantive change; there was no legal duty to consult before making the amendment; and neither the DPP nor the Attorney General breached any statutory or protocol-based duty in the process.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 3508 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Nicola Kenward; Claimant: Mervin Kenward; 1st Defendant: Director of Public Prosecutions; 2nd Defendant: Her Majesty's Attorney General for England and Wales; Intervener: AM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment in the High Court (administrative Court)
Outcome
Application for judicial review dismissed
Legal Topics
Assisted Suicide, Prosecutorial Discretion, Article 8 ECHR, Judicial Review, Policy Clarification
Criminal Law Human Rights Administrative Law Assisted Suicide Prosecutorial Discretion Article 8 ECHR Judicial Review Policy Clarification

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicola Kenward

Claimant

Mervin Kenward

Claimant

Director of Public Prosecutions

1st Defendant

Her Majesty's Attorney General for England and Wales

2nd Defendant

AM

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment in the High Court (administrative Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the October 2014 amendment to the DPP's Policy for Prosecutors in Respect of Cases of Encouraging or Assisting Suicide was lawful
  2. 2 Whether the DPP was required to consult before amending the policy
  3. 3 Whether the DPP or Attorney General breached any statutory or protocol-based duty in the amendment process

Ratio Decidendi

The October 2014 amendment to the DPP's policy was a lawful clarification of the intended meaning of the relevant factor regarding healthcare professionals and carers, not a substantive change; there was no legal duty to consult before making the amendment; and neither the DPP nor the Attorney General breached any statutory or protocol-based duty in the process.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review is dismissed.