Remy Farrell: Judgment may influence law – but this is a very human tragedy
Published 11/01/2013 | 17:00
THE result in Marie Fleming's case did not come as a great surprise to most lawyers who had followed the case. While the arguments put forward by both sides were both subtle and complex, the basic proposition that she would have had to establish to win her case was that the law criminalising assisted suicide was so unfair and unreasonable that it was unconstitutional.
Given that many other countries have chosen to prohibit assisted suicide in a similar way, the argument was always going to be a difficult one to win.
The judgment of the divisional High Court reveals that this was very much a case of two halves.