Three women had been refused the supply of contraceptives prescribed for hem by their doctors by the claimant pharmacists, who were later found to have infringed their duties of supply. The claimants had argued that they had the right to apply their ehical or relgious principles, but the court found that the contraceptives were not abortifacients allowing any such exemption.
Held: The compliants were inadmissible: ‘as long as the sale of contraceptives is legal and occurs on medical prescription nowhere other than in a pharmacy, the applicants cannot give precedence to their religious beliefs and impose them on others as justification for their refusal to sell such products, since they can manifest those beliefs in many ways outside the professional sphere.’
Human Rights, Health Professions, Ecclesiastical
Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.515301