SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Re Leith Dorene Patteson [2016] QSC 104
PARTIES:
RE LEITH DORENE PATTESON
(applicant)FILE NO:
BS 4099 of 2016
DIVISION:
Trial Division
PROCEEDING:
Originating Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court of Queensland
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:
21 April 2016
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
21 April 2016
JUDGE:
Burns J
ORDER:
The court orders that:
1. The testes and any spermatozoa of the deceased, Tony Brian Deane, (“the Removed Tissue”) be removed;
2. The Removed Tissue be provided to an IVF organization nominated by the applicant, Leith Dorene Patteson;
3. Any blood tests advised by the IVF organization be carried out; and
4. The Removed Tissue be stored pending a future application to the Supreme Court for the use of the Removed Tissue.
The court directs that this Order be served by telephone call and email from the applicant’s solicitors to:
1. The IVF organisation;
2. The facility at which the body of the deceased is currently being stored; and
3. The family of the deceased, through their solicitors, Munro Legal, Ground Floor, 154 Hume Street, Toowoomba, 07 4659 9958, bill@munrolegal.com.
CATCHWORDS:
PROCEDURE – SUPREME COURT PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – JURISDICTION AND GENERALLY – GENERALLY – where the applicant made an urgent application seeking an order authorising the removal and storage of the testes and any spermatozoa from her recently deceased partner – whether such an order should be made
Transplantation and Anatomy Act 1979 (Qld), s 24
Baker v State of Queensland [2003] QSC 2
KJR v Attorney-General for Queensland [2008] QSC 325
Re Denman [2004] 2 Qd R 595
Re Floyd [2011] QSC 218
Re Gray [2001] 1 Qd R 35COUNSEL:
K McMillan for the applicant
K Parrot for the amicus curiaeSOLICITORS:
Aden Lawyers for the applicant
Crown Law for the amicus curiae
[1]HIS HONOUR: The applicant before the court is Leith Doreen Patteson. Her fiancé, Tony Brian Deane, died late last night when the life support machine to which he was connected at the Toowoomba Base Hospital was disconnected. Ms Patterson has applied to the Court for orders authorising the removal of the testes and any spermatozoa from Mr Deane’s body, the provision of what is removed to an IVF organisation nominated by her, the carrying out of any blood tests advised by the IVF organisation and the storage of the testes and any spermatozoa pending a future application to this court for their use.
[2]Ms Patteson is represented on this application by Ms McMillan QC. Mr Parrott, who has considerable experience in this area, appears as amicus curiae and Mr Munro, who represents Mr Deane’s family but, in particular, Mr Deane’s parents, appears by telephone.
[3]Mr Parrott does not oppose the making of the orders sought and has very properly drawn to the court’s attention the doubts previously expressed as to whether the court may ultimately entertain an application such as this. See: Re Gray [2001] 1 Qd R 35; Baker v State of Queensland [2003] QSC 2.
[4]However,…
Continue reading Re Leith Dorene Patteson
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Re Leith Dorene Patteson [2016] QSC 104
- Case
- [2016] QSC 104
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were primarily centred around the applicant's right to seek the preservation of her deceased partner's sperm and whether such an action was within the court's jurisdiction. The court had to balance the applicant's rights and desires against the rights of the deceased's family, who had not consented to the removal and storage of the testes. Furthermore, the court considered the ethical and medical implications of the proposed action.
Justice Byrne found that the applicant had established a sufficient connection to Queensland to grant the requested order. The court recognised the applicant's right to make decisions regarding the use of her deceased partner's sperm, provided that such decisions were in accordance with the law and did not unduly infringe upon the rights of others. The court also considered the medical evidence provided, which indicated that the testes could be removed and stored without compromising the integrity of the deceased's body for a funeral. After weighing these factors, the court concluded that it was appropriate to grant the order sought by the applicant.
Accordingly, the court made an order that the testes and any spermatozoa of the deceased be removed, provided to an IVF organisation nominated by the applicant, and stored pending a future application to the Supreme Court for the use of the removed tissue. The court also directed that this order be served by telephone call and email to relevant parties, including the IVF organisation, the facility at which the deceased's body was stored, and the deceased's family through their solicitors.
Orders
Orders of the court
The court orders that:
1. The testes and any spermatozoa of the deceased, Tony Brian Deane, (“the Removed Tissue”) be removed;
2. The Removed Tissue be provided to an IVF organization nominated by the applicant, Leith Dorene Patteson;
3. Any blood tests advised by the IVF organization be carried out; and
4. The Removed Tissue be stored pending a future application to the Supreme Court for the use of the Removed Tissue.
The court directs that this Order be served by telephone call and email from the applicant’s solicitors to:
1. The IVF organisation;
2. The facility at which the body of the deceased is currently being stored; and
3. The family of the deceased, through their solicitors, Munro Legal, Ground Floor, 154 Hume Street, Toowoomba, 07 4659 9958, bill@munrolegal.com.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.