Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB: CA 6 Feb 1997

At the applicant’s request samples of sperm were taken from her husband hours prior to his death, when he was in a coma.
Held: Sperm cannot lawfully be taken from a comatose man in order later to allow his surviving wife to be artificially inseminated. There was no written permission as required by the Act.
Lord Woolf MR
Times 07-Feb-1997, [1997] 2 WLR 806, [1999] Fam 151, [1997] EWCA Civ 4003, [1997] 2 CMLR 591, [1997] COD 261, [1997] 2 FCR 501, [1997] Eu LR 370, [1997] 2 FLR 742, [1997] 2 All ER 687, [1997] Fam Law 401, (1997) 35 BMLR 1
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB Admn 17-Oct-1996
Sperm which had been taken from a dying and unconscious man may not be used for the later insemination of his surviving wife. The Act required his written consent.
Held: Community Law does not assist the Applicant. The question had been . .

Cited by:
CitedThe Centre for Reproductive Medicine v U FD 24-Jan-2002
The defendant sought to use the sperm of her deceased husband for her insemination. The deceased had apparently withdrawn his consent to the use of his sperm posthumously. His widow claimed that he had been influenced to change the form, by an . .
Appealed toRegina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB Admn 17-Oct-1996
Sperm which had been taken from a dying and unconscious man may not be used for the later insemination of his surviving wife. The Act required his written consent.
Held: Community Law does not assist the Applicant. The question had been . .
CitedAHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
CitedL v the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority FD 3-Oct-2008
The claimant had sought fertility treatment with her husband. Now, after his death, she sought an order to declare lawful the continued use of the stored gametes.
Held: The request failed. Without explicit consent, the court had no power to . .
CitedYearworth and others v North Bristol NHS Trust CA 4-Feb-2009
The defendant hospital had custody of sperm samples given by the claimants in the course of fertility treatment. The samples were effectively destroyed when the fridge malfunctioned. Each claimant was undergoing chemotherapy which would prevent them . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 April 2021; Ref: scu.141342