Site icon Bindmans

PHIL NEWBY v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE CO/2726/2019

Decision

The court has rejected Phil’s application to properly consider the evidence he wishes to present from experts around the world that a law change is proportionate, the court merely stating that this is best done by Parliament and that the Conway case is a bar to further consideration of Phil’s case.

Phil Newby said in response:

The High Court’s decision not to hear my case, and not to test the evidence for-and-against assisted dying, is disappointing to me and the many hundreds of others who support my case. With their support, I will be fighting on to bring attention to a law that is widely thought to be cruel, so that it can be replaced by something more humane and compassionate.

Saimo Chahal QC (Hon), Phil’s solicitor said:

It is important that the highest court should have an opportunity to consider issues which it is accepted are if transcendental importance to Phil and many others in his situation. An appeal will shortly  be lodged in the court of appeal as the prospect of Parliament considering the issues is non existent.

Background

On Tuesday 22nd October at 2pm there was a permission hearing for a terminally ill man with motor neurone disease who is seeking to challenge the blanket ban on assisted dying. Phil Newby, 49, from Rutland, (who is married with two teenage daughters) is asking the Court to undertake a “detailed examination of the evidence” to determine whether the current blanket ban is compatible with his human rights.

Asking Divisional Court Judges Lord Justice Irwin and Mrs Justice May to examine a large body of expert evidence from all over the world and to cross-examine experts is a novel legal approach in a judicial review claim, but Phil & his legal team believe that this is the only way that the court can decide whether it is proportionate to change the law in favour of people like Phil, whilst ensuring that safeguards exist to protect the weak and vulnerable.

If Phil was successful in this argument, this will be an important development of the legal procedure in this area. It is vital that this should happen in order to overcome the stalemate in these cases – without listening to the evidence, the court cannot arrive at a fair and balanced decision in this sensitive area.

Noel Conway’s claim was rejected by the Supreme Court November 2018. Phil Newby’s case presents a novel approach to the evidence. Moreover, since that time, there have also been significant developments in the UK and overseas that mean that the Court should consider Phil’s case:

Please note that Phil Newby will NOT be attending Court on Tuesday but is available to speak to the media and for interviews at home.

Dignity in Dying, MDMD and Fate are supporting Phil’s case.

Phil Newby is represented by Saimo Chahal QC (Hon) Partner, Bindmans LLP and Paul Bowen QC Brick Court Chambers. Junior counsel is Adam Wagner, Doughty Street Chambers and Jennifer Macleod of Brick Court.

NOTES TO THE EDITORS

Full background on Phil’s case can be found in the press release regarding the launch of the case here.

Phil Newby has raised funds for the case through Crowdjustice.

The law on assisted dying in the UK

Noel Conway’s legal case

Developments – support for a law change

Exit mobile version