An application to delay life-saving treatment provided to 12-year-old Archie Battersbee with brain damage was unsuccessful.
The Court of Appeal has granted temporary residence to withdraw alimony until tomorrow afternoon.
Archie – who has been on life support since April after being found unconscious by his mother at home in Southend, Essex – was prepared for treatment at 2pm today.
But after intervention from the government and the UN, the Court of Appeals held a hearing that began at 11 a.m. on Monday.
The judges have now refused to allow their rulings to be appealed in the Supreme Court.
Archie’s parents, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee, can now ask Supreme Court judges to review their application for direct appeal.
Doctors treating the child at the Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel, east London, said the boy was brain dead and that continuing life support treatment was not in the boy’s best interest.
The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has asked the UK government to suspend the withdrawal of Archie’s life support until it has had a chance to review the case.
Sir Andrew McFarlane, seated with Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Moylan at the Court of Appeal, said the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, on which the UN commission based its request, was an “international treaty” unconsolidated”.
“It is not part of UK law … and it is inappropriate for this court to apply an unincorporated treaty to its decision-making process,” he said.
“Every day that (Archie) continues to receive life-sustaining treatment is against his best interest and so staying, even for a short time, goes against his best interests. him,” he added.
The judge said it was the decision that had been made in the courts of England and Wales.
Sir Andrew said Archie’s case was “serious” because “his system, his organs and, ultimately, his heart are in the process of shutting down”.
Edward Devereux QC, representing Ms. Dance and Mr. Battersbee, declared the UN commission’s request to be “binding” under international law.
He argued that any behavior that did not comply with the commission’s request, made under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, signed and ratified by the UK in 2008 and 2009, would be “serious, grave and unacceptable violation of international law”.
