An NHS Foundation Trust v AB & Ors

An NHS Foundation Trust v AB & Ors

AB is not Gillick competent; parental refusal is overridden; surgery is overwhelmingly in AB's best interests due to severe impairment, high likelihood of success, minimal risks, and lack of effective alternatives.

Parties
Applicant: AN NHS Foundation Trust; First Respondent: AB (by her Child’s Guardian); Second Respondent: CD; Third Respondent: EF
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Originating Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Declaration granted; court authorises cataract surgery and lawful deprivation of liberty if required.
Legal Topics
Gillick Competence, Parental Responsibility, Best Interests of the Child, Consent to Medical Treatment, Court's Inherent Jurisdiction
Family Law Medical Law Child Welfare Gillick Competence Parental Responsibility Best Interests of the Child Consent to Medical Treatment Court's Inherent Jurisdiction

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AN NHS Foundation Trust

Applicant

AB (by her Child’s Guardian)

First Respondent

CD

Second Respondent

EF

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether AB is Gillick competent to consent or refuse cataract surgery
  2. 2 Whether parental refusal can be overridden
  3. 3 Whether cataract surgery is in AB's best interests

Ratio Decidendi

AB is not Gillick competent; parental refusal is overridden; surgery is overwhelmingly in AB's best interests due to severe impairment, high likelihood of success, minimal risks, and lack of effective alternatives.

Court Disposition

Declaration granted; court authorises cataract surgery and lawful deprivation of liberty if required.

Orders

  • AB to undergo bilateral cataract surgery as soon as practicable
  • Any deprivation of AB's liberty for surgery and consequential care is lawful