• In Petrus Jacobus Jooste v General Medical Council [2010], Dr Jooste applied for an interim suspension order made against him to be terminated on the grounds that he was not notifi ed electronically of the hearing as he had requested (due to unreliability of mail to his address) and was therefore not in attendance at the hearing and it should have been adjourned. Dr Jooste also submitted that, as earlier Care Quality Commission investigations into his conduct had been completed with no action taken, there was no case to answer at the GMC. It was held that the Medical Act 1983 requires the GMC Interim Orders Panel to give notice by one of four methods, none of which is electronic; in Dr Jooste’s case, postal notice was both suffi cient and entirely appropriate. Furthermore, the GMC was not bound by the CQC proceedings and, as a result, Dr Jooste’s application was rejected.
  • Recent Spanish press reports suggest that two Spanish prisoners have received IVF treatment whilst in prison. Fernando Garcia Jodra, 40, and his girlfriend Nerea Bengoa Zarisolo, 39, were convicted of terrorist activities associated with the Basque separatist organisation ETA in 2004. They are being held in separate prisons and denied physical contact with each other, but Mr Jodra was transferred to a different prison to undergo fertility treatment. The couple are reportedly being treated at the Reina Sofi a Hospital in Corboda in Southern Spain. If the treatment is successful, the couple’s child is to remain with Ms Zarisolo in custody until s/he is three years old. In contrast, the UK courts have ruled that prisoners do not have the right to receive IVF while in custody. This came under fi re in 2007 when the ECtHR found that the UK Government was in breach of its obligations under Article 8 ECHR, by denying fertility treatment to Kirk Dickinson, who was serving a life sentence for murder.