High Court of Justice
Family Division
Case No: FD24P00320
Neutral Citation: [2024] EWHC 2910 (Fam)
Date: 15th November 2024
Judge: Mrs Justice Morgan

Parties Involved

• Applicant:
  • Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust (GOSH)
• Respondents:
  • Neriman Braqi (1st Respondent)
  • Ayden Braqi (2nd Respondent, represented by his CAFCASS Guardian)

Representation

• Applicant (GOSH): Debra Powell KC (instructed by GOSH In-House Legal Team)
• 1st Respondent (Neriman Braqi): Cleo Perry KC and Frankie Shama (instructed by Dawson Cornwell LLP)
• 2nd Respondent (Ayden Braqi): Malcolm Chisholm (instructed by CAFCASS)

Key Facts

The case involves the Great Ormond Street Hospital seeking a court ruling concerning the care and medical treatment of Ayden Braqi, a child under the care of his mother, Neriman Braqi. The issue at the heart of the case concerns decisions regarding the ceiling of care—a decision about the level of medical intervention and treatment that should be provided to Ayden. The hospital has sought judicial approval for its proposed treatment approach, which it argues may differ from the wishes of the child’s mother.

Legal Issues

• Ceiling of Care:
  The primary legal issue concerns the determination of what level of medical care is appropriate for Ayden, considering his current condition and prognosis. The hospital has asked the court to approve its proposed care plan, which includes restrictions on the level of intervention.
• Disagreement between Medical Professionals and Family:
  The case also involves a disagreement between the medical team at Great Ormond Street and the child’s family regarding the appropriateness and extent of care. The involvement of a CAFCASS guardian for Ayden underscores the need for an independent voice to represent the child’s best interests.

Hearing Details

• The court hearings took place over several dates, including 23rd to 25th October 2024 and 13th November 2024 for matters related to the ceiling of care.
• The hearings focused on evaluating the medical evidence, the child’s condition, and the family’s wishes, as well as determining the appropriate level of medical intervention.

Observations

• The case involves sensitive and complex issues, particularly in terms of balancing the medical expertise and the family’s wishes regarding treatment.
• Mrs Justice Morgan had to consider both the child’s best interests and the ethical implications of the proposed medical interventions.
• The court’s decision will have significant implications for the management of Ayden’s care, as it sets precedents regarding how the courts handle disputes between healthcare providers and families in life-limiting or critical care situations.

Decision

• The court’s decision focused on approving a care plan that takes into account both the medical needs of Ayden Braqi and the concerns raised by his family. The judge’s ruling reflects a careful consideration of the medical evidence and the principle of acting in the best interests of the child.