Court of Appeal judges set to consider critically ill baby’s case
A High Court judge recently ruled that doctors could lawfully limit the treatment they provide to Indi Gregory – against the wishes of her parents.
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
The parents of a critically ill baby are preparing to stage an appeal after losing a High Court fight.
A High Court judge recently ruled that doctors could lawfully limit the treatment they provide to Indi Gregory – against the wishes of her parents, Dean Gregory and Claire Staniforth.
Mr Justice Peel heard evidence about Indi’s condition at a private trial in the Family Division of the High Court, in London.
The judge heard that Indi, who was born on February 24 2023 and will be eight months old on Tuesday, has mitochondrial disease, a genetic condition that saps energy, and is being treated at the Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham.
Specialists say she is dying and bosses at the hospital’s governing trust asked Mr Justice Peel to rule that doctors could lawfully limit treatment provided to her.
Indi’s parents, who are both in their 30s and from Ilkeston, Derbyshire, say life support treatment should continue.
They are being supported by campaign group the Christian Legal Centre.
Two appeal judges, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Birss, are listed to oversee a Court of Appeal hearing, at the Royal Courts of Justice, in London, on Monday.
Barrister Emma Sutton KC, who led Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust’s legal team, told Mr Justice Peel that Indi was critically ill and had an exceptionally rare and devastating neurometabolic disorder.
She said the treatment Indi received caused pain and was futile.
Mr Gregory told Mr Justice Peel that his daughter had “proved everyone wrong” and needed “more time”.
Mr Justice Peel considered evidence behind closed doors but allowed journalists to attend the hearing and ruled that Indi, her parents and the hospital can be named in reports.
He ruled that medics treating Indi, and a guardian appointed to represent her interests, could not be named.