Relatives of grandparents in their 50s were injured in the brain and paralyzed from the neck down to the Covid-19 virus having won the most recent battle for life support.
A judge in the security court ruled earlier this year that the woman should be allowed to die.
The relatives appealed the decision to the appellate court a few weeks ago and the appellate judges granted their appeal and ruled that the case could be re-opened soon.
Justice Hayden initially considered evidence in the Defense Court case, while judges ruled on cases involving unscrupulous officials in London, and ruled that life support should be terminated by the end of October.
Specialists treating the woman – whom doctors have described as the worst Covid patient in the world – at Addenbrooke Hospital in Cambridge said life support should be stopped.
The woman’s relatives disagreed and demanded more time.
The appellate court complained about the trip Mr Justice Hayden made to the hospital to see the woman.
They argued that perhaps the judge had noticed the woman’s problem.
However, they asserted that his family had not had the opportunity to present their case to the judge.
Sir Andrew McFarlane, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, Lord Justice Moylan and Sir Nicholas Patten heard the case in the London Court of Appeal in early November.
Doctors told Justice Hayden, a resident of the Family Division of the High Court, that the woman was the “most serious” patient of Covid-19 in the world.
Addenbrooke experts said there was nothing he could do to “make every aspect of his culture better” and that life support was harassing him and adding to his “burden”.
They thought that her life might be tested in a few months and said that moving her to a health facility would help her to die peacefully and without stress.
Justice Hayden said this was the first time a judge had considered the death penalty for Covid-19.
He heard how the woman, who was overweight and in poor health, was hospitalized with Covid-19 symptoms in late 2020.
Barrister Katie Gollop QC, who represented the medical authorities, said the woman’s case appeared “special”.
He said the woman was “completely paralyzed” and had “severe” cognitive impairment.
One expert said the woman had “unexplained” problems in the UK in the past.
Justice Hayden ruled that the woman could not be identified in the media.
Lord Justice Moylan stated in the ruling that what happened when Justice Hayden saw the woman in hospital could be “further interpretation”.
The language that Justice Hayden used in his verdict could indicate that he “saw that (he) had given him information about his wishes,” said Lord Justice Moylan.
“If this is true, the judge’s verdict is invalid for two reasons,” added Lord Justice Moylan.
“First of all, it is highly controversial that the judge was not well prepared to recognize his wishes and opinions on his travels. His critical medical condition meant that he did not qualify for any such examination.
“If the trip was used by a judge for these reasons, the verification of the review may require further proof or, in some cases, further.
“Secondly, in order to ensure justice, all parties must be informed of this and given the opportunity to comment.”
The best videos are delivered every day
Look for important articles, from your inbox
Original Article reposted fromSource link
Disclaimer: The website autopost contents from credible news sources and we are not the original creators. If we Have added some content that belongs to you or your organization by mistake, We are sorry for that. We apologize for that and assure you that this won’t be repeated in future. If you are the rightful owner of the content used in our Website, please mail us with your Name, Organization Name, Contact Details, Copyright infringing URL and Copyright Proof (URL or Legal Document) aT spacksdigital @ gmail.com
I assure you that, I will remove the infringing content Within 48 Hours.