Surrogate meaning

Wesson (Chair of Friends of Mill Road Bridge) v Cambridgeshire County Council [2024] EWHC 1068 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Two practical themes arise. The first concerns procedure for challenges under RTRA 1984, Sch 9, para 35, where the court delivered two generally applicable points. On summary judgment, the discussion at paras [7]–[11] culminates in a caution at paras [10]–[11]: in many instances the correct course is to proceed straight to a substantive hearing. It is a clear indication that using a summary judgment application in para [35] matters as a surrogate for a judicial review permission stage is inappropriate. The second point reiterates that an Order impugned under para [35] will only be quashed if, in accordance with RTRA 1984, Sch 9, para 36, the applicant has suffered substantial prejudice (see paras [126]–[127]). On that basis, the claimant’s first ground was struck out because no substantial prejudice was shown—a reminder of the hurdle that prospective challengers must meet...

In this issue: Data protection and life sciences Post-market Commercialisation Pharmaceuticals—regulatory framework Research and development Medical devices Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Useful information Data protection and life sciences Council adopts European Health Data Space Regulation The Council of the European Union has approved the European Health Data Space (EHDS) Regulation, designed to improve cross-border availability of health information across the European Union. The measure will strengthen people’s oversight of their electronic health data and permit its secondary use for scientific research. Member States must set up digital health authorities and uphold the European electronic health record exchange format. The Regulation will apply 20 days after it appears in the Official Journal of the European Union, signalling a major move towards the digitalisation of healthcare across Europe. Refer to: LNB News 21/01/2025 58...

E v R and others [2023] EWFC 214 What are the practical implications of this case? The central message from this decision is that, although intended parents are not legally required to obtain a parental order, appreciating the particular composition of international families is crucial to pinpoint potential difficulties in other legal systems. Professional guidance should be taken overseas, ideally prior to conception and, in any event, before lodging any court application in this jurisdiction. Had the couple sought a parental order here without considering the knock-on effects for the child in Italy, the child might have faced serious, long-term consequences that could not easily be undone... What was the background? The matter concerned a gestational surrogacy arrangement in Argentina entered into by E and L, a male same-sex couple, with a surrogate who was a close family friend. E and L had been together since 2000 and formalised their relationship with a civil union in Argentina (their country of birth) on 8 December 2004...

Reviews in insolvency proceedings A review in insolvency proceedings is the court’s reconsideration of an order it has already made. The review mechanism, available in both corporate and personal insolvency, permits a determination to be looked at again either by the judge who issued it (see Official Receiver v Bathurst) or by a different judge (see Re W & A Glaser Ltd). The authority to revisit orders is a feature particular to the insolvency court. For corporate insolvency, the power appears in the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, r 12.59(1), which provides that the corporate insolvency court may review, rescind, or vary any order it has made when exercising its jurisdiction. The equivalent in personal insolvency is section 375 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). That provision, mirroring the corporate regime, states that the court may review, rescind, or vary any order made by it in the exercise of its jurisdiction. Reviews should not be treated as a substitute for an appeal, and...

A surrogacy arrangement describes a situation in which a woman carries a baby for another person, with the expectation that, at birth, the child will be passed to the commissioning couple or party and then brought up as their own. The principal provisions governing these arrangements are set out in the: Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 (SAA 1985) Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA 2008) Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Parental Orders) Regulations 2010, SI 2010/985 (SI 2010/985), revoked by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Parental Orders) Regulations 2018, SI 2018/1412 (SI 2018/1412) Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (Remedial) Order 2018, SI 2018/1413 (SI 2018/1413) It is an offence to carry out commercial surrogacy arrangements in the UK, see: The meaning of a surrogacy arrangement. Guidance The government has issued guidance for surrogates and intended parents explaining how to start a family through a surrogacy arrangement, and on how to care for surrogates and intended parents in England...