Woman embryo appeal verdict due
A woman left infertile after cancer therapy is due to learn a court's final judgement on her plea to use frozen embryos fertilised by an ex-partner.
Natallie Evans, from Trowbridge, Wilts, and Howard Johnston began IVF treatment in 2001 but he withdrew consent for the embryos to be used after they split up.
She turned to the European courts after exhausting the UK legal process.
Ms Evans, 35, says her appeal to the Grand Chamber of the European Court is her last chance to have a baby.
'Great sympathy'
Ms Evans was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2001, but six of the couple's fertilised embryos were frozen and stored prior to her treatment.
But she and Mr Johnston, who lives in Gloucester, split up in 2002 and he wrote to the clinic asking for the embryos to be destroyed.
Ms Evans took the case to the High Court in 2003 asking to be allowed to use them without Mr Johnston's permission.
She has argued he had already consented to their creation, storage and use, and should not be allowed to change his mind.
Current UK laws require both the man and woman to give consent, and allows either party to withdraw that consent up to the point where the embryos are implanted.
Ms Evans lost both the case and the appeal and was told she could not take the case to the House of Lords.
She then appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, which again ruled against her a year ago.
The judges said: "The court, like the national courts, had great sympathy for the plight of the applicant who, if implantation did not take place, would be deprived of the ability to give birth to her own child."
But, in a majority verdict, it was ruled that even in such exceptional circumstances as those of Ms Evans, the right to a family life - enshrined in article eight of the European Convention of Human Rights - could not override Mr Johnston's withdrawal of consent.
It also ruled unanimously that the embryos did not have an independent right to life.
'Wrong way'
Her final route of appeal is before the Grand Chamber of the European Court.
Ms Evans's solicitor, Muiris Lyons, said the ruling was her "last chance".
He told the BBC's Today programme: "What we're saying to the Strasbourg court is that the UK law can regulate how IVF is dealt with in a number of different ways.
"But to have this rule that there must be consent of both parties at all times without exceptions is the wrong way to do it.
"There should be a mechanism for dealing with exceptional cases."
Dr Mark Hamilton, chairman of the British Fertility Society, warned that the rights of men would be adversely affected if the court were to rule in Ms Evans's favour.
He added: "It would be downgrading the role that a man has.
"Unfortunately, relationships do run into trouble."
Speaking after the ruling from the European Court of Human Rights, Mr Johnston said he was not thinking about it in terms of a victory.
"The key thing for me was just to be able to decide when, and if, I would start a family," he added.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think??
