Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.
Chapter
Essential Cases: Tort Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11. The document also included supporting commentary from author Craig Purshouse.
Chapter
All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines cases when a patient is unable to give consent to medical treatment, and considers: the consent requirement under criminal law and civil law; the form that consent should take; and the principle of autonomy. It discusses how the law treats patients who lack capacity or whose capacity is in doubt. It offers detailed analysis of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and recent Court of Protection decisions. It also covers cases involving the withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment from patients who lack capacity.
Chapter
This chapter considers the consent requirement and the principle of autonomy. It then discusses how the law treats patients who lack capacity, offering detailed analysis of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and its application, including cases involving the withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment.
Chapter
All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines the issue of ‘informed consent’, i.e. how much information must be provided to patients before they consent to medical treatment. It first considers the ethical justifications for informing patients about their medical treatment and then examines the legal framework that protects patients’ interests in information disclosure, with particular emphasis upon the implications of the recent landmark Supreme Court case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire. The chapter also explores some alternatives to the law of tort, and the importance of the guidance produced by the medical profession.
Chapter
This chapter examines ‘informed consent’, and the question of how much information must be provided to patients before they consent to medical treatment. It first considers the ethical justifications for informing patients and then examines the legal framework that protects patients’ interests in information disclosure. The chapter also explores some alternatives to the law of tort, and the guidance produced by the medical profession.
Chapter
This chapter, which examines the so-called parliamentary privileges of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, begins by discussing Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1689. It then explores over three hundred years of the history of parliamentary privilege in five general areas: (i) the houses’ power to regulate their own composition through the admission, retention, and expulsion of their members; (ii) the publication of details of house business; (iii) the admissibility before the courts of such published material; (iv) the concept of ‘contempt of the house’; and (v) the regulation of MPs’ ethical standards. The chapter also analyses several seminal cases in which the courts have adjudicated on both the nature and extent of parliamentary privilege and considers how case law in relation to this area of the constitution balances the sometimes competing concepts of the sovereignty of Parliament, the rule of law, and the separation of powers.
Chapter
This chapter, which examines the privileges of Parliament, begins by discussing Article 9 of the Bill of Rights. It then explores over three hundred years of the history of parliamentary privilege in five general areas: (i) the houses’ power to regulate their own composition through the admission, retention, and expulsion of their members; (ii) the publication of details of house business; (iii) the admissibility before the courts of such published material; (iv) the concept of ‘contempt of the house’; and (v) the regulation of MPs’ ethical standards.
Chapter
G. T. Laurie, S. H. E. Harmon, and E. S. Dove
This chapter discusses ethical and legal aspects of biomedical research. After highlighting the evolution and acceleration of rule-making in this setting, it differentiates between research and experimentation, and articulates a core regulatory concept, namely risk. It then covers ethical codes and legal instruments in human biomedical research, research ethics committees, randomised controlled trials, and experimental treatment, paying particular attention to informed consent and research involving people lacking capacity. It also addresses the unethical researcher, compensation for personal injury in research, research involving human tissue and personal data, and new approaches to research governance.
