Sign in
England and Wales Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

England and Wales Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

England and Wales decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family law

Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust v RNM & Ors

Given the severity and irreversibility of RN’s brain and brain stem injury, his total dependence on invasive ventilation, lack of meaningful awareness or purposeful movement, ongoing pain and suffering from medical interventions, and the unanimous medical evidence that continued life-sustaining treatment confers no benefit and only prolongs suffering, it is not in RN’s best interests for life-sustaining treatment to continue. The presumption in favour of preserving life is rebutted on these facts.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental responsibility
  • Medical futility
  • Inherent jurisdiction
  • Declarations as to lawfulness of treatment withdrawal
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 812 (Fam)

G (Discontinuation of Ventilatory Support), Re

G (Discontinuation of Ventilatory Support), Re [2026] EWHC 812 (Fam) (02 April 2026)

The High Court held that continued mechanical ventilation for G, a severely brain-injured child, was no longer in her best interests and authorised withdrawal.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Medical ethics
  • Parental rights
  • Delay in medical proceedings
  • Withdrawal-of-life-sustaining-treatment
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 452 (Fam)

Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust v RNM & Ors

Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust v RNM & Ors [2026] EWHC 452 (Fam) (27 February 2026)

The High Court authorised withdrawal of ventilatory support for a severely brain-injured toddler, holding that ongoing treatment was not in his best interests.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental responsibility
  • Inherent jurisdiction
  • Medical ethics
  • Withdrawal-of-life-sustaining-treatment
Read case analysis
Family law

Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board v SR & Ors

It is not in TR’s best interests for life-sustaining treatment to continue given the overwhelming medical evidence of irreversible brain damage, absence of cognitive awareness, no prospect of recovery, and the burdens of ongoing invasive treatment, despite the parents’ religious beliefs and wishes.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental rights
  • Religious considerations in medical treatment
  • Children act 1989
  • Human rights (echr)
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 348 (Fam)

Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board v SR & Ors

Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board v SR & Ors [2026] EWHC 348 (Fam) (19 February 2026)

The High Court held that life-sustaining treatment should be withdrawn from a child with irreversible Leigh syndrome and no prospect of recovery.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental rights
  • Religious beliefs and medical care
  • Children act 1989
  • Echr articles 2, 8, 9
Read case analysis
Family law [2026] EWHC 253 (Fam)

NM (A Child), In the Matter Of

NM (A Child), In the Matter Of [2026] EWHC 253 (Fam) (26 January 2026)

The High Court held that it was not in NM’s best interests to continue life-sustaining treatment and authorised withdrawal in hospital with palliative care.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Inherent jurisdiction
  • Declaratory relief
  • Parental rights
  • Article 2 echr
Read case analysis
Family law [2025] EWHC 3215 (Fam)

Liverpool City Council v VT & Ors

Liverpool City Council v VT & Ors [2025] EWHC 3215 (Fam) (05 December 2025)

The High Court authorized withdrawal of life-sustaining ventilation for an eight-year-old child, finding it was no longer in his best interests. Direct in-person contact with his mother was refused.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • End-of-life care
  • Children act 1989 s34(3) contact
  • Withdrawal-of-life-sustaining-treatment
  • Best-interests-of-child
Read case analysis
Family law

The Trust v Z and Others (Withdrawal of Medical Treatment)

The court finds that the burdens of continued life-sustaining treatment for Z, including pain, suffering, and futility, outweigh the presumption to preserve life. There is no prospect of recovery or improvement. It is no longer in Z's best interests for life-sustaining treatment to continue. The Trust's application to withdraw treatment is granted.

  • Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental rights
  • Sanctity of life
  • Medical futility
  • Echr article 2
Read case analysis
Family law

Q (A Child) (Withdrawal of Treatment), Re

Mechanical ventilation is not in Child Q’s best interests because it is futile, prolongs pain and suffering, and confers no meaningful benefit. The burdens of continued treatment outweigh the theoretical benefit of continued existence. The court must act in Child Q’s best interests, giving appropriate but not pre-eminent weight to parental religious beliefs.

  • Withdrawal of medical treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental responsibility
  • Religious beliefs and medical decisions
  • Futility of treatment
Read case analysis
Family law [2025] EWHC 2782 (Fam)

Q (A Child), Re (Withdrawal of Treatment)

Q (A Child), Re (Withdrawal of Treatment) [2025] EWHC 2782 (Fam) (28 October 2025)

The High Court held that continuing mechanical ventilation for a profoundly unwell newborn was not in his best interests and authorised withdrawal.

  • Withdrawal of medical treatment
  • Best interests of child
  • Parental responsibility
  • Religious beliefs and medical care
  • End-of-life decisions
  • Withdrawal-of-medical-treatment
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

England and Wales decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.