R. (on the application of Lamb) v Ministry of Justice
R. (on the application of AM) v DPP
Also known as:
Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice
Supreme Court
25 June 2014
Case Analysis
Where Reported
[2014] UKSC 38; [2014] 3 W.L.R. 200; [2014] 3 All E.R. 843; [2014] 3 F.C.R. 1; [2014] H.R.L.R. 17; 36 B.H.R.C. 465; (2014) 139 B.M.L.R. 1; Times, June 26, 2014; Official Transcript
Case Digest
Subject: Criminal law Other related subjects: Criminal procedure; Human rights; Health
Keywords: Assisted suicide; Codes of practice; Director of Public Prosecutions; Offences; Prosecutions; Right to respect for private and family life
Summary: The Suicide Act 1961 s.2 did not impose what would be regarded under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 as a "blanket ban" on assisted suicide, which would take it outside the margin of appreciation afforded to Convention states on that issue. The Supreme Court declined to order the Director of Public Prosecutions to amend her policy on prosecuting cases of alleged assisted suicide.
Abstract: The appellants in the first action (N and L) appealed against a decision ([2013] EWCA Civ 961, [2014] 2 All E.R. 32) that English law relating to assisted suicide did not infringe the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. In the second action, the appellant Director of Public Prosecutions appealed against an order requiring her to amend her policy on prosecutions in alleged assisted suicide cases; the respondent (M) cross-appealed on the extent of the required amendments. N, L and M suffered from catastrophic physical disabilities but their mental processes were unimpaired. They wished to die but could not end their lives without a third party's assistance. The Suicide Act 1961 s.2 imposed criminal liability on those who assisted suicide. The Court of Appeal rejected N and L's arguments for a declaration either that assisted suicide would be lawful, or that the state of the law was