English court upholds ban on newspaper publishing identity of HIV-positive health-care worker

In the last issue of the Review, we reported about an HIV-positive health-care worker in the UK who brought legal proceedings to prevent the National Health Service from notifying his previous patients that he is infected. In February 2002, the Court of Appeal for England and Wales (Civil Division) upheld a ban on publishing his name and that of the health authority for which he worked.     

Court orders publication ban in trial for identity of HIV-positive witness

In September 2001, an Ontario trial judge in a criminal assault case ordered a ban on publishing the identities of both the HIV-positive complainant and the man accused of assaulting the complainant, or any evidence from the legal proceedings that would tend to identify them.     

UK: court upholds ban on condoms at psychiatric hospital

In September 2001, a gay man with hepatitis C held as a patient at a high-security psychiatric hospital applied for judicial review of the hospital's policy banning access to condoms for patients. His application was denied by the High Court on 30 October 2001.     

UK: Court of Appeal orders retrial in UK's first HIV criminal transmission case

On 5 May 2004, the UK Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, granted Mohammed Dica's appeal against his October 2003 conviction on two counts of causing grievous bodily harm for reckless transmission of HIV. The court ordered a retrial after determining that the trial judge was wrong to not allow the defendant to present information that the victims had known about his condition and had consented to the risk.     

US: appeals court dismisses employment discrimination suit by HIV-positive dental hygienist

Shortly before the decision in Toyota Motor Manufacturing, the US Court of Appeals (11th Circuit) issued another restrictive judgment, in a case dealing specifically with HIV-based discrimination. On 21 December 2001, in Waddell v Valley Forge Dental Associates Inc, it dismissed the case of a dental hygienist who sued his employer for suspending him from treating patients after he tested HIV-positive. The decision is a setback for efforts to ensure that the Americans with Disabilities Act translates into actual protection against discrimination for people with HIV/AIDS.     

UK: Welsh court reduces sentence, cites HIV status

A Welsh appeal court has reduced the sentence handed down to an offender because of his HIV status, despite his lengthy criminal record. The court reduced the sentence from five to three-and-a-half years' imprisonment.     

US: court rules deportation of HIV-positive Dominican does not violate convention against torture

The US District Court for New York has upheld a tribunal decision deporting an HIV-positive Dominican national. The court held that the tribunal did not err in finding that Rogelio Reyes-Sanchez had failed to show that he would more likely than not be subject to torture if deported. The court agreed that evidence suggesting that people living with HIV/AIDS may receive substandard medical treatment from public and private hospitals in the Dominican Republic di not constitute evidence of torture.     

South Africa: highest court orders government to provide antiretrovirals to prevent mother-to-child transmission

On 5 July 2002, South African treatment activists won a significant victory when the Constitutional Court ordered the South African government to make the antiretroviral drug nevirapine available in public hospitals and clinics for the purposes of preventing mother-to-child transmission of HIV. The Court also ruled the government has a constitutional obligation to implement a program to realize the right of pregnant women and their newborn children to access health services to prevent transmission.     

Trial court decision in Houle case

The plaintiffs in this case, a hospital and an attending physician, petitioned the court to exercise its parens patriae authority when the parents of a newborn with multiple birth defects refused to consent to surgery that would permit normal feeding and respiration. Basing his decision on the medical necessity and feasibility of the proposed treatments and setting aside the issue of the infant's quality of life, Justice David G. Roberts of the Superior Court ruled that the parents had no right to withhold care from their child. He authorized the infant's guardian ad litem to consent to surgery and other standard life-preserving measures that were immediately necessary, retaining jurisdiction for the court over future developments in the case.     

HIV-positive child made ward of court after father refuses treatment with antiretroviral drugs

In 1999, we reported a number of cases in Canada, the US, and the UK in which child-welfare authorities have disputed parents' decisions to refuse HIV testing or treatment for their children. This article reports on new developments in one of those cases. On 10 May 2002, the English High Court heard submissions regarding the future of a three- year-old HIV-positive girl who was made a ward of the court after her father refused to allow her to be treated with antiretroviral drugs.     

Australia: court orders doctors to pay damages to woman who contracted HIV from her husband

IN a case that received extensive media coverage, the New South Wales Supreme Court has found two doctors negligent for failing to take steps to make a bride aware that she was at risk as a result of her prospective husband's HIV infection. The court awarded the woman AUD$727,437 in damages. The couple had attended the physicians together to be tested for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, but had received their test results separately. She subsequently contracted HIV as a result fo unprotected sexual intercourse with him.     

UK court considers the industrial application of biotech patent claims

Speculative uses for a protein are not sufficient to fulfilthe requirement for industrial application since a patent isnot a ‘hunting licence’ to find a use for an invention.     

Spanish court rules in 'Accessorize' trade marks case

The Barcelona Court of First Instance No. 1 found in favourof the claimants, owners of the famous registered trade mark‘Accessorize’ in their action for trade mark infringement,trade mark cancellation, unfair competition, and damages inrespect of the use by the defendants of the Accessori, Mr Accessoriand Accessori trade marks.     

UK court rules government erred in denying housing assistance to woman with HIV

In March 2002, the English High Court of Justice ruled that municipalities have a duty to use their powers to provide assistance where refusal to do so would infringe an applicant's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.