What Re JS (Disposal of Body) is not about

A quick reprise of the court’s unambiguous judgment

On 19 November, we posted Cryonics and the law: Re JS (Disposal of Body), which included a report of the case and some observations. There has been extensive media interest in the court’s decision relating to JS, although many of the statements and assumptions made do not bear close scrutiny. Throughout his judgment in Re JS (Disposal of Body) [2016] EWHC 2859 (Fam)Peter Jackson J was at considerable pains to dispel any misinterpretations that might arise, as will be evident from the following extracts. In the circumstances, we thought that the relevant passages were worth repeating [our  emphases]: Continue reading