Supreme Court nullifies patent ruling on living organisms

Supreme Court ruling broadens BRCA testing options.

T he day after Mother's Day, actress Angelina Jolie wrote an op-ed in the New York Times revealing her decision to undergo a double mastectomy after learning that she carries a deleterious mutation in the BRCA1 gene. Jolie and women like her who have certain germ-line BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations are at higher risk for breast and ovarian cancers. Jolie, whose mother died from ovarian cancer, said s...

Supreme Court reaffirms landmark informed-consent ruling in chickenpox case.

In June the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a British Columbia family physician had adequately discharged her duty to disclose even though she failed to tell her patient of a serious but very small increased risk to her fetus posed by a case of chickenpox. The patient, Carole Arndt, gave birth in 1986 to a daughter who was diagnosed with congenital varicella syndrome. She requires feeding th...

Implications and reflections on the 2010 Supreme Court ruling on Canada’s AHR Act

In December, 2010, Canada's 6 year old Assisted Human Reproduction Act was successfully challenged in the Supreme Court of Canada. There may be important implications for public health and the evolution of reproductive technologies in this country.

How Much Has the Supreme Court Changed Patent Law

Gardner; re BWV: Victorian Supreme Court makes landmark Australian ruling on tube feeding.

The Victorian Supreme Court has decided that artificial nutrition and hydration provided through a percutaneous gastrostomy tube to a woman in a persistent vegetative state may be withdrawn. The judge ruled, in line with a substantial body of international medical, ethical and legal opinion, that any form of artificial nutrition and hydration is a medical procedure, not part of palliative care,...