Test case biographies in the (hidden) province of medical jurisprudence
Test case biographies in the (hidden) province of medical jurisprudence
This paper outlines the method(s) developed to create ‘biographies’ of pivotal health care law test cases, in order to explore their provenance and impact, and reflects on the implications of what emerges from this biographical approach for understanding the role of judicial rulings in the development of the law.
Three leading health care law cases, displaying a range of typical variables, will be used to illuminate how social and ethical dilemmas give rise to litigation, rather than other approaches to resolving issues, and the implications for legal theory and policy making. The cases are Quintavalle v HFEA [2005] UKHL 28, wherein a pressure group, CORE, intervened to challenge a regulatory decision, in which it had no personal interest; Burke v GMC [2005] EWCA Civ 1003, where a court ruling was sought regarding the application of non-statutory guidance on the provision of life-sustaining treatment; and R (on the application of AC) v Berkshire West PCT [2011] EWCA Civ 247, on the rationality of a ‘rationing’ decision, and the interplay between procedural and substantive values.
The paper considers how to situate judges within the biography of a case and whether insights from ‘case biographies’ might have a role within judicial decision-making
Montgomery, Jonathan
0c34f729-6726-4d33-9bd5-0bf9db58a1cc
Jones, Caroline
e39a554e-f70d-4f90-b0dc-efa252e7d41e
10 September 2014
Montgomery, Jonathan
0c34f729-6726-4d33-9bd5-0bf9db58a1cc
Jones, Caroline
e39a554e-f70d-4f90-b0dc-efa252e7d41e
Montgomery, Jonathan and Jones, Caroline
(2014)
Test case biographies in the (hidden) province of medical jurisprudence.
Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference, Nottingham, United Kingdom.
08 - 11 Sep 2014.
Record type:
Conference or Workshop Item
(Paper)
Abstract
This paper outlines the method(s) developed to create ‘biographies’ of pivotal health care law test cases, in order to explore their provenance and impact, and reflects on the implications of what emerges from this biographical approach for understanding the role of judicial rulings in the development of the law.
Three leading health care law cases, displaying a range of typical variables, will be used to illuminate how social and ethical dilemmas give rise to litigation, rather than other approaches to resolving issues, and the implications for legal theory and policy making. The cases are Quintavalle v HFEA [2005] UKHL 28, wherein a pressure group, CORE, intervened to challenge a regulatory decision, in which it had no personal interest; Burke v GMC [2005] EWCA Civ 1003, where a court ruling was sought regarding the application of non-statutory guidance on the provision of life-sustaining treatment; and R (on the application of AC) v Berkshire West PCT [2011] EWCA Civ 247, on the rationality of a ‘rationing’ decision, and the interplay between procedural and substantive values.
The paper considers how to situate judges within the biography of a case and whether insights from ‘case biographies’ might have a role within judicial decision-making
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 10 September 2014
Venue - Dates:
Society of Legal Scholars Annual Conference, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2014-09-08 - 2014-09-11
Organisations:
Southampton Law School
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 374562
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/374562
PURE UUID: 37f619ed-8294-4954-bf67-24aafb0f7aaf
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 20 Feb 2015 16:09
Last modified: 11 Dec 2021 06:03
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Jonathan Montgomery
Author:
Caroline Jones
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics