Wyatt & Anor v Portsmouth Hospital NHS & Anor

Wyatt & Anor v Portsmouth Hospital NHS & Anor

The High Court judge correctly applied the best interests test, considering all relevant medical and welfare factors, and was entitled to continue the declarations authorising non-ventilation of Charlotte Wyatt in the event of a medical crisis. The concept of 'intolerability' is not a legal test but a guide within the broader best interests analysis. Prospective declarations are permissible where justified by the facts, provided they are subject to review if circumstances change.

Parties
Appellants: Darren & Deborah Wyatt; 1st Respondent: Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust; 2nd Respondent: Charlotte Wyatt (A Child) (by her guardian ad litem CAFCASS Legal Services)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (family Division, Medical Treatment) / Appeal From High Court Judgment; Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal on best interests refused; declarations continued subject to review.
Legal Topics
Best Interests of the Child, Withdrawal or Withholding of Medical Treatment, Declaratory Relief, Parental Responsibility, Inherent Jurisdiction of the Court, Medical Ethics
Family Law Medical Law Children Law Best Interests of the Child Withdrawal or Withholding of Medical Treatment Declaratory Relief Parental Responsibility Inherent Jurisdiction of the Court +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren & Deborah Wyatt

Appellants

Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust

1st Respondent

Charlotte Wyatt (A Child) (by her guardian ad litem CAFCASS Legal Services)

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (family Division, Medical Treatment) / Appeal From High Court Judgment; Application for Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct legal test for determining the best interests of a child in the context of life-sustaining medical treatment?
  2. 2 Was the High Court judge correct to continue declarations authorising non-ventilation of Charlotte Wyatt in the event of a medical crisis?
  3. 3 Should such declarations be made prospectively or only at the point of medical necessity?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court judge correctly applied the best interests test, considering all relevant medical and welfare factors, and was entitled to continue the declarations authorising non-ventilation of Charlotte Wyatt in the event of a medical crisis. The concept of 'intolerability' is not a legal test but a guide within the broader best interests analysis. Prospective declarations are permissible where justified by the facts, provided they are subject to review if circumstances change.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal on best interests refused; declarations continued subject to review.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal on the 'best interests' issue refused.
  • Appeal on the 'timing' issue dismissed.