NHS Trust v X (In the matter of X (A Child) (No 2))

NHS Trust v X (In the matter of X (A Child) (No 2))

The decision of a Gillick competent minor or a minor aged 16 or over is not determinative in all circumstances regarding medical treatment; the court retains power to override such decisions in the child's best interests, and this principle remains valid under current law and human rights jurisprudence.

Parties
Applicant: A NHS Trust; Respondent: X; Advocate to the Court: Cafcass Legal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Originating Application Under Inherent Jurisdiction (medical Treatment for a Minor) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for declarations dismissed; application for rolling order refused; certificate for leapfrog appeal and permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Gillick Competence, Consent to Medical Treatment, Parens Patriae Jurisdiction, Best Interests of the Child, Human Rights Act 1998, Mental Capacity Act 2005, European Convention on Human Rights, Religious Freedom, Discrimination on Grounds of Age
Family Law Medical Law Human Rights Gillick Competence Consent to Medical Treatment Parens Patriae Jurisdiction Best Interests of the Child Human Rights Act 1998 +4 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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A NHS Trust

Applicant

X

Respondent

Cafcass Legal

Advocate to the Court

Procedural Posture

Originating Application Under Inherent Jurisdiction (medical Treatment for a Minor) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Gillick competent minor has exclusive right to refuse medical treatment
  2. 2 Whether a court can override refusal of medical treatment by a Gillick competent minor or a minor aged 16 or over
  3. 3 Compatibility of common law and statutory principles with Human Rights Act 1998 and European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The decision of a Gillick competent minor or a minor aged 16 or over is not determinative in all circumstances regarding medical treatment; the court retains power to override such decisions in the child's best interests, and this principle remains valid under current law and human rights jurisprudence.

Court Disposition

Application for declarations dismissed; application for rolling order refused; certificate for leapfrog appeal and permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • X's application for declarations is dismissed.
  • No rolling order authorising blood transfusions is made.