CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 27 février 2023

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } Legal summary March 2023 Medmoune v. France (communicated case) - 55026/22   Article 2 Positive obligations Article 2-1 Life Medical decision to stop life-sustaining treatment for patient who had drawn up advance directive to the contrary: communicated The applicants are the wife and sisters of a man who was hospitalised in a deep coma following a serious accident in May 2022. In June 2022 a first medical decision to stop life-sustaining treatment, on the basis that its continuation would amount to an act of “unreasonable obstinacy”, was stayed at their suit on the ground that account had not been taken of an advance directive he had drawn up in June 2020 (and of which the doctors had been unaware). His directive had entrusted the applicants with the task of taking the necessary decisions to keep him alive “even artificially” should he be “in a prolonged state of coma judged to be irreversible”. In July 2022, after further consideration as a panel, the doctors decided to “discontinue treatment” and place the patient under “continuous deep sedation until death”; their decision was based on Article   L.   1111‑11 of the Public Health Code, which requires doctors to follow an advance directive unless it appears to be “manifestly inappropriate or not in conformity with the medical situation”. The applicants made an urgent application for a stay of that decision and sought a preliminary ruling on the constitutionality of the provision in question. On the hearing of an appeal in August 2022 the Conseil d’État judge responsible for interim matters agreed to refer the constitutionality issue to the Constitutional Council. In November 2022 (see Decision no. 2022-1022 QPC ) the Constitutional Council ruled that the provision in question was consistent with the principles of protection of human dignity and freedom of conscience, and with all the other rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. That month the Conseil d’État judge responsible for interim matters, having regard inter alia to that ruling, dismissed the applicants’ appeal against the refusal to stay the decision to discontinue treatment. The applicants complain that their family member’s advance directive has been disregarded and that nothing further stands in the way of implementation of the medical decision to discontinue treatment. Case communicated under Article 2 of the Convention.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .