Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
MR. JUSTICE CRANE ____________________ BETWEEN: THE QUEEN on the application of BRUNO QUINTAVALLE on behalf of PRO-LIFE ALLIANCE and SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH ____________________ (Transcript of the Handed Down Judgment of Smith Bernal Reporting Limited, 190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7421 4040, Fax No: 020 7831 8838 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr.Gerald Barling QC and Mr.Martin Chamberlain appeared for the Claimant. Mr.James Eadie appeared for the Defendant. ____________________ HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT AS APPROVED BY THE COURT ____________________ Crown Copyright ©
The central issue in this application for judicial review is whether the organism created by cell nuclear replacement ("CNR"), an organism often referred to as an "embryo", falls within the definition of "embryo" in section 1(1) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Section 1(1) reads:
(b) references to an embryo include an egg in the process of fertilisation, and, for this purpose, fertilisation is not complete until the appearance of a two cell zygote".
It is common ground that the CNR process does not involve fertilisation. It involves a procedure commonly known as cloning. To avoid begging the question, I shall not refer to the organism created by CNR as an "embryo" in this judgement.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.