Skip to content
Law Society of Scotland
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
Search
Find a Solicitor
Contact us
About us
Sign in
  • For members

    • For members

    • CPD & Training

    • Membership and fees

    • Rules and guidance

    • Regulation and compliance

    • Journal

    • Business support

    • Career growth

    • Member benefits

    • Professional support

    • Lawscot Wellbeing

    • Lawscot Sustainability

  • News and events

    • News and events

    • Law Society news

    • Blogs & opinions

    • CPD & Training

    • Events

  • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying and education

    • Qualifying as a Scottish solicitor

    • Career support and advice

    • Our work with schools

    • Lawscot Foundation

    • Funding your education

    • Social mobility

  • Research and policy

    • Research and policy

    • Research

    • Influencing the law and policy

    • Equality and diversity

    • Our international work

    • Legal Services Review

    • Meet the Policy team

  • For the public

    • For the public

    • What solicitors can do for you

    • Making a complaint

    • Client protection

    • Find a Solicitor

    • Frequently asked questions

    • Your Scottish solicitor

  • About us

    • About us

    • Contact us

    • Who we are

    • Our strategy, reports and plans

    • Help and advice

    • Our standards

    • Work with us

    • Our logo and branding

    • Equality and diversity

  1. Home
  2. News and events
  3. Legal news
  4. Human Rights Court rejects Battersbee parents' petition

Human Rights Court rejects Battersbee parents' petition

4th August 2022 | human rights | Human rights

The European Court of Human Rights has refused to intervene in the case of Archie Battersbee, the 12 year old boy whose life support doctors are proposing to turn off.

Archie's parents had sought an interim order under the court's rule 39 to prevent the hospital caring for the boy from withdrawing life support. This followed the refusal by the UK Supreme Court of permission to appeal the refusal of a stay on the hospital taking that step as requested by the UN Committee for the Rights of People with Disabilities. No information was available as to how long that committee would need to consider the case.

The English courts have decided that it is in Archie's best interests to end his treatment, on "compelling" medical evidence that he has sustained irreversible brain stem damage. Archie was found unconscious by his mother in April this year with a ligature over his head. She believes he had been taking part in an online challenge. He has since been kept alive while in a coma. His parents say his heart is still beating and he has been able to grip his mother's hand. However doctors have said there is no prospect of his recovery.

In their application to the Strasbourg court, Archie's parents argued that the failure to honour the UN Committee's request breached article 2 of the Human Rights Convention, recognising the right to life, read with article 14 (prevention of discrimination). They also lodged a substantive application founding on article 2 and several other articles. They sought an interim order under rule 39, the rule by which the court ordered the UK Government to suspend its plan to remove refugee applicants to Rwanda pending a decision by the English courts on the legality of the scheme.

Refusing the order, the court's President, Judge Robert Spano, found that the conditions for admissibility of the applications under articles 34 and 35 of the Convention had not been met, indicating that the court would respect the consideration given by the UK courts. He did so without deciding whether the court in fact had jurisdiction: article 35 states that the court will not deal with any application already submitted to another procedure of international investigation or settlement.

Archie's parents have now exhausted all the legal avenues open to them. His life support will be withdrawn at 11am today unless they attempt to have him moved to a hospice, which doctors have also advised against.

Add To Favorites

Additional

  • News and events

In this section

  • Law Society news
  • CPD & Training
  • Blogs & opinions
  • Events
  • 75th Anniversary

Categories

  • civil litigation
  • criminal law
  • employment
  • obituary
  • careers
  • practice management
  • law society of scotland
  • government-administration
  • welfare/benefits
  • family-child law
  • reparation
  • professional regulation
  • property (non-commercial)
  • insolvency
  • consumer
  • human rights
  • mental health-adult incapacity
  • planning/environment
  • europe
  • information technology
  • immigration
  • education-training
  • executries
  • corporate
  • commercial property
  • agriculture-crofting
  • dispute resolution
  • risk management
  • intellectual property
  • client relations
  • tax
  • licensing
  • banking-financial services
  • trusts-asset management
  • reviews
  • opinion
  • For the public
  • Research and policy
  • Regulation
  • Journal online news
  • interview

News Archive

  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013

Related articles

  • Consultation explores support for learning disabilities
  • Ministers will not appeal s 35 ruling, nor withdraw bill
  • Restricted UNCRC Bill approved by Holyrood
  • IBA revises Business and Human Rights guidance
Law Society of Scotland
Atria One, 144 Morrison Street
Edinburgh
EH3 8EX
If you’re looking for a solicitor, visit FindaSolicitor.scot
T: +44(0) 131 226 7411
E: lawscot@lawscot.org.uk
About us
  • Contact us
  • Who we are
  • Strategy reports plans
  • Help and advice
  • Our standards
  • Work with us
Useful links
  • Find a Solicitor
  • Sign in
  • CPD & Training
  • Rules and guidance
  • Website terms and conditions
Law Society of Scotland | © 2025
Made by Gecko Agency Limited