No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2003
The European Court of Human Rights recently confirmed that the exceptionless prohibition of assisted suicide under section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961, which had been unsuccessfully challenged by the applicant in the House of Lords because of its effects on persons physically unable to commit suicide unassisted by another (R. (Pretty) v. DPP, [2001] UKHL 61, [2001] 3 W.L.R. 1598, noted by Keown (2002) 61 C.L.J. 8), is compatible with the United Kingdom’s obligations towards the applicant under the European Convention on Human Rights: Pretty v. United Kingdom, judgment of 29 April 2002. As she had before the House of Lords, Mrs. Pretty put forward arguments under Articles 2, 3, 8, 9 and 14 of the Convention. Important differences between the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the House of Lords emerged only in the assessment of the merits of Mrs. Pretty’s case with regard to Article 8 and Article 14.