Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:32:31.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DEVOLUTION AND DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN CITIZENS UNDER ARTICLE 14 ECHR: PRESERVING LOCAL PROVISION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2017

Leanne Cochrane
Get access

Extract

Many women from Northern Ireland (NI) travel to England each year to pay for abortion services because of the limited availability of the service in NI. In R (on the application of A and B) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for Health (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 41; [2017] 1 W.L.R. 2492, the Supreme Court was asked whether it was unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health to have failed to make provision for abortion services free of charge under the National Health Service in England to women who are UK citizens usually resident in NI. The majority answered “no” and, on delivering the judgment, Lord Wilson (for the majority) described the Court as “sharply divided” on both the public law and human rights arguments that had been before it.

Type
Case and Comment
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , November 2017 , pp. 472 - 475
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)