Debbie Purdy’s case endorses the courts’ belief in the need for fl exibility, says Seamus Burns
The claimant, Debbie Purdy, (in Purdy, R (on the application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions & Anor [2008] EWHC 2565 (Admin)), took an action for judicial review and a claim under Art 7 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998).
Ms Purdy claimed that the director of public prosecutions (DPP) had acted unlawfully in failing to publish detailed guidance and “to promulgate a specific policy”, as to the circumstances in which individuals will or will not be prosecuted for assisting another person to commit suicide under the Suicide Act 1961 (SA 1961), s 2(1), and, in particular, where the assisted suicide occurs in a country where the practice is legal.
A further argument of the claimant was that the failure of the DPP to promulgate a specifi c policy or issue detailed guidance on the circumstances in which a person will or will not be prosecuted for assisting another person to commit suicide, meant that the DPP had acted in a way that was incompatible with
