Prevention is Better than Cure, But who Foots the Bill? R (National AIDS Trust) v NHS England. (23rd April 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hurley, Ciara Frances
• Is Part Of: Medical law review. Volume 27:Number 1(2019)
• Page Start: 155
• Page End: 164
• Publication Date: 2018-04-23
• Subjects: Local authorities' powers and duties -- HIV -- National Health Service Act 2006 -- Public health -- Preventative medicine -- Statutory interpretation; Medical laws and legislation -- Great Britain -- Periodicals; Medical jurisprudence -- Periodicals; Jurisprudence -- Periodicals; Legislation, Medical -- Periodicals; Medical jurisprudence; Medical laws and legislation; Great Britain; 344.41041
• DOI: 10.1093/medlaw/fwy018
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0967-0742

Abstract

Abstract: This case note discusses R (on the Application of National Aids Trust) v The National Health Service Commissioning Board (NHS England), The Local Government Association, The Secretary of State For Health [2016] EWCA Civ 1100. The case is an appeal on an earlier finding by the High Court that the power to commission pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) lies within National Health Service (NHS) England's competence, instead of being within the realm of local authorities' responsibilities. It now forms the sole piece of judicial guidance on NHS England's duties under the National Health Service Act 2006 and is significant for the process by which the Court of Appeal reached its decision. Rather than adhere to the literal meaning of relevant legislation, the judges engaged in a holistic examination of the issue to reach a functional and sensible decision. Examining this case under the lens of both legal theory and pragmatism, comment is made on the soundness of the judges' approach and it is argued that the decision reached was the correct one. This case now forms binding precedent on this issue and the clear process by which the judges reached their conclusion may form instructive guidance for similar such problems in the future.