R (on the application of Condliff) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust [2011] EWCA Civ 910, [2011] All ER (D) 254 (Jul)
Although the Strasbourg Court had recognised that in principle Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights might be relied on to impose a positive obligation on a state to take measures to provide support for an individual, including medical support, there was no reported cases in which the court had upheld such a claim by an individual complaining of the state’s non-provision of medical treatment. It was established law that Art 8 could not be considered applicable each time an individual’s everyday life was disrupted but only in exceptional cases where the state’s failure to adopt measures interfered with the individual’s right to personal development and his or her right to establish and maintain relations with other human beings and the outside world.
Even where such a link existed, regard had to be had to the fair balance that had to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and of the community as a whole, and to the wide margin of appreciation
