| Display title | David Hewitt, 'Illegitimate concern' (2013) 157(25) SJ 9 |
| Default sort key | David Hewitt, 'Illegitimate concern' (2013) 157(25) SJ 9 |
| Page length (in bytes) | 1,165 |
| Page ID | 7459 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Counted as a content page | Yes |
| Edit | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Move | Allow only users with "editing" permission (infinite) |
| Page creator | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 10:46, 5 September 2013 |
| Latest editor | Jonathan (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 22:59, 19 March 2023 |
| Total number of edits | 10 |
| Total number of distinct authors | 1 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | This article argues that the unmarried father of an adult patient is a relative for the purposes of s26, whether or not he had parental responsibility. This seems wrong as the wording of s26 means that for its purposes an unmarried father is not a relative of an adult patient because it is not possible to have parental responsibility for an adult. It may be in future that the the courts are asked to adjudicate on whether or not the situation is compatible with the ECHR, in particular in relation to an unmarried father who used to have parental responsibility. |
