Rex v Bourne

{{#invoke:infobox|infoboxTemplate | italic title = | bodyclass = scotus ib-court-case | templatestyles = Infobox court case/styles.css

| above = Rex v Bourne | aboveclass = fn | image = {{#if:|[[File:{{{image}}}|image=Template:Infobox court case/images|size=|sizedefault=frameless|upright=0.82|alt= }} | autoheaders = yes | caption =

| label1 = Court | data1 = Central Criminal Court

| label2 = Full case name | data2 = Rex v Aleck Bourne

| label3 = Argued | data3 =

| label4 = Reargued | data4 =

| label5 = Submitted | data5 =

| label6 = Indictment | data6 =

| label7 = Started | data7 =

| label8 = Decided | data8 = 1938

| label9 = Docket nos. | data9 =

| label10 = Verdict | data10 =

| label11 = Defendant | data11 =

| label12 = Charge | data12 =

| label13 = Prosecution | data13 =

| label14 = Counsel for plaintiff | data14 =

| label15 = Plaintiff | data15 =

| label16 = Defence | data16 =

| label17 = Witnesses | data17 =

| label18 = Citation | data18 = [1938] 3 All ER 615

| label19 = ECLI | data19 =

| label20 = Neutral citation | data20 =

| label21 = Reported at | data21 =

| label22 = Transcript | data22 =

| label23 = Claim | data23 =

| label24 = Cases cited | data24 =

| label25 = Legislation cited | data25 =

| header27 = Case history

| label28 = Prior action | data28 =

| label29 = Appealed from | data29 =

| label30 = Appealed to | data30 =

| label31 = Subsequent action | data31 =

| label32 = Procedural history | data32 =

| label33 = Related action | data33 =

| label34 = Argument | data34 =

| label35 = Reargument | data35 =

| label36 = Opinion announcement | data36 =

| header42 = Outcome | data43 =

| header44 = Questions presented | data45 =

| header46 = Holding | data47 =

| header48 = Ruling | data49 =

| header52 = Court membership | label53 = Judge sitting | data53 = Mr. Justice Macnaghten

| label54 = Chief judge | data54 =

| label55 = Associate judges | data55 =

| header56 = Case opinions | data57 =

| data58 =

| label59 = Decision by | data59 =

| label60 = Majority | data60 =

| label61 = Majority | data61 =

| label62 = Majority | data62 =

| label63 = Plurality | data63 =

| label64 = Plurality | data64 =

| label65 = Plurality | data65 =

| label66 = Plurality | data66 =

| label67 = Seriatim opinion | data67 =

| label68 = Seriatim opinion | data68 =

| label69 = Seriatim opinion | data69 =

| label70 = Seriatim opinion | data70 =

| label71 = Seriatim opinion | data71 =

| label72 = Concurrence | data72 =

| label73 = Concurrence | data73 =

| label74 = Concurrence | data74 =

| label75 = Concurrence | data75 =

| label76 = Concurrence | data76 =

| label77 = Concurrence | data77 =

| label78 = Concurrence | data78 =

| label79 = Concurrence | data79 =

| label80 = Concur/dissent | data80 =

| label81 = Concur/dissent | data81 =

| label82 = Concur/dissent | data82 =

| label83 = Concur/dissent | data83 =

| label84 = Concur/dissent | data84 =

| label85 = Concur/dissent | data85 =

| label86 = Concur/dissent | data86 =

| label87 = Concur/dissent | data87 =

| label88 = Dissent | data88 =

| label89 = Concurrence | data89 =

| label90 = Dissent | data90 =

| label91 = Concurrence | data91 =

| label92 = Dissent | data92 =

| label93 = Concurrence | data93 =

| label94 = Dissent | data94 =

| label95 = Concurrence | data95 =

| label96 = Dissent | data96 =

| data97 =

| header98 = Laws applied

| data99 =

| data100 =

| data101 =

| data102 =

| data103 =

| data104 =

| data105 =

| data106 =

| data107 =

| header108 = Keywords | data109 = Abortion, Medical Law, Therapeutic Abortion

| header110 = Area of law | data111 =

}}

Rex v Bourne was a landmark legal case in the United Kingdom that took place in 1938. The case is significant in the history of abortion law as it set a precedent for the interpretation of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, particularly concerning the legality of therapeutic abortions.

Background

In the early 20th century, abortion was largely illegal in the United Kingdom under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, which criminalized the act of procuring a miscarriage. However, the law did not clearly define the circumstances under which an abortion could be considered lawful, leading to ambiguity and legal challenges.

Dr. Aleck Bourne, a respected obstetrician, performed an abortion on a 14-year-old girl who had been raped by soldiers. Dr. Bourne believed that continuing the pregnancy would severely harm the girl's mental and physical health. He reported the procedure to the authorities, leading to his prosecution under the 1861 Act.

The Trial

The trial took place at the Central Criminal Court, commonly known as the Old Bailey, in 1938. Dr. Bourne was charged with unlawfully procuring a miscarriage. The defense argued that the abortion was necessary to preserve the girl's health, both mental and physical.

Mr. Justice Macnaghten presided over the case. In his summing up, he directed the jury to consider whether the abortion was performed in good faith for the purpose of preserving the life or health of the girl. The jury acquitted Dr. Bourne, establishing a precedent that an abortion could be lawful if performed to preserve the health of the woman.

Significance

The case of Rex v Bourne was pivotal in shaping the legal landscape of abortion in the UK. It introduced the concept of "therapeutic abortion," where the procedure could be justified on the grounds of preserving a woman's health, not just her life. This interpretation influenced later legal developments, including the Abortion Act 1967, which further clarified the conditions under which abortions could be legally performed.

Legal Impact

Rex v Bourne is often cited in discussions of medical ethics and law, particularly in relation to the duty of care owed by medical professionals to their patients. The case highlighted the importance of considering the mental and physical well-being of patients when making medical decisions.

Also see

• Abortion Act 1967
• Offences Against the Person Act 1861
• Medical ethics
• Therapeutic abortion