The ownership that wasn't meant to be: Yearworth and property rights in human tissue

This paper is concerned with the English Court of Appeal's decision in Yearworth v North Bristol NHS Trust that six men had, for the purposes of their claims against the trust, ownership of the sperm they had produced. The case has been discussed by many commentators and most, if not all, of th...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rostill, Luke David (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2014
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2014, Volume: 40, Issue: 1, Pages: 14-18
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1816147273
003 DE-627
005 20230426115749.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2013-101449  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816147273 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816147273 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Rostill, Luke David  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The ownership that wasn't meant to be: Yearworth and property rights in human tissue 
264 1 |c 2014 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This paper is concerned with the English Court of Appeal's decision in Yearworth v North Bristol NHS Trust that six men had, for the purposes of their claims against the trust, ownership of the sperm they had produced. The case has been discussed by many commentators and most, if not all, of those who have discussed the case have claimed or assumed that the court held that the claimants had property rights in the sperm they had produced. In this paper, I advance an interpretation of the case that does not regard the court as deciding that the men had property rights (in the narrow sense of that term) in the sperm they had produced. On this view, the ‘ownership’ that the Court of Appeal purported to vest in each of the men was not a right in rem, a right ‘binding the world’. If this is so, it is perhaps unsurprising that some scholars, evaluating the success of the court's reasoning as a justification for vesting the claimants with property rights, have found it to be unsatisfactory. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 40(2014), 1, Seite 14-18  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:40  |g year:2014  |g number:1  |g pages:14-18 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/43282904  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/40/1/14.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via free pdf)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2013-101449  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/40/1/14.abstract  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185601174 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816147273 
LOK |0 005 20220908053618 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-03#D5E3A569F0120D89EDF30F7A386143B3D7C8C56C 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/43282904 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw