Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland [1993]

[1993] AC 789 · House of Lords (UK) · United Kingdom

RemediesremediesRemediesDeclaratory relief; withdrawal of medical treatment; best interests

Issue

Whether it is lawful to discontinue artificial feeding and hydration from a patient in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery.

Held

Yes, it is lawful to withdraw treatment, as it is not in the patient's best interests to continue treatment.

Exam use

Summary

Whether it is lawful to discontinue artificial feeding and hydration from a patient in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery.

Facts

Issue

Whether it is lawful to discontinue artificial feeding and hydration from a patient in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery.

Held

Yes, it is lawful to withdraw treatment, as it is not in the patient's best interests to continue treatment.

Ratio Decidendi

When further medical treatment offers no benefit to the patient and is futile, the court may declare that it is lawful to withdraw treatment even if the patient will die.

Reasoning

Essay-Ready Explanation Generator

Version 1 of 4

Reference to Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland ([1993] AC 789) strengthens a Remedies answer because the case reflects the principle that When further medical treatment offers no benefit to the patient and is futile, the court may declare that it is lawful to withdraw treatment even if the patient will die. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as Whether it is lawful to discontinue artificial feeding and hydration from a patient in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery. The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.

Underlying Concepts

  • remedies
  • Remedies
  • Declaratory relief; withdrawal of medical treatment; best interests
  • case authority
  • exam application

Significance

Related Cases

No related cases listed.

Exam Tips

Revision Checklist

  • Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
  • State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
  • Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
  • Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.