OT (A Child), Re

OT (A Child), Re

The judge's refusal to adjourn was within her discretion given the urgency and clarity of the medical evidence. The proceedings were fair, the parents had adequate opportunity to participate, and the orders made were in the child's best interests. There was no procedural irregularity or breach of Article 8 ECHR.

Parties
Applicants: Mr and Mrs T; First Respondent: AN NHS Trust; Second Respondent: OT (A Child, by his Guardian ad Litem)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Family/medical Treatment Application / Application for Permission to Appeal (refused)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Treatment, Best Interests of Child, Procedural Fairness, Article 8 ECHR
Family Law Medical Law Human Rights Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Treatment Best Interests of Child Procedural Fairness Article 8 ECHR

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr and Mrs T

Applicants

AN NHS Trust

First Respondent

OT (A Child, by his Guardian ad Litem)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family/medical Treatment Application / Application for Permission to Appeal (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing an adjournment to allow parents to gather further evidence
  2. 2 Whether the timing of the hospital's application infringed the child's or parents' rights under Article 8 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the orders to withdraw life-sustaining treatment and withhold interventions were lawful and in the child's best interests

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's refusal to adjourn was within her discretion given the urgency and clarity of the medical evidence. The proceedings were fair, the parents had adequate opportunity to participate, and the orders made were in the child's best interests. There was no procedural irregularity or breach of Article 8 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Refusal of permission to appeal from orders authorising withdrawal of ventilation and withholding of further interventions; hospital permitted to implement palliative care.