The Human Tissue Authority (HTA) was surprised to be named as the respondent in the matter of SW earlier this year – there had been no contact or information from the applicants before the papers were served – on a matter relating to a bone marrow donation involving an individual who it was claimed lacked capacity to consent to the procedure.
The HTA’s role in considering approval for cases of living donation is to ensure that - as well as no financial incentive being present - there is no coercion of the donor. As noted by the presiding judge, The Rt Hon Lord Justice Munby, there was no appropriate evidence submitted relating to:
- whether the recipient wished the procedure to take place;
- who would carry out the procedure;
- expert medical evidence relating to the nature and/or risks of the procedure; and
- evidence that the donor lacked capacity.
In his own words, The Rt Hon Lord Justice Munby concluded that “evidence on all these matters is almost wholly lacking”.
We are pleased to hear that the court judgment, published today, ruled so clearly in striking this case out, deeming it a “scarcely coherent application”, and “totally without merit, it is misconceived and it is vexatious”.
For more information on the HTA’s role in bone marrow and PBSC donation see our website here.
You can also find detail on the full judgement on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website here