ABSTRACT
Until recently, separated human bodily materials could not legally be the property of the person from whom they were removed under the common law. However, third parties could acquire property rights in these materials through the application of work or skill – the so-called ‘work or skill exception’ (hereafter the ‘work/skill’ exception). Although there were no generalisable principles about the types of activities which could trigger the exception, the effect of this common law principle was, as Margaret Brazier has explained, that ‘body parts become, as if by magic, property, but property owned by persons unknown, for purposes unforeseen’. To this, she added ‘If that represents the law, the law is an ass’.
Quigley, Muireann and Skene, Loane, Property Interests in Human Tissue: Is the Law Still an Ass? (October 16, 2015) in Pioneering Healthcare Law: Essays in Honour of Margaret Brazier (pp 156-157) (Biomedical Law and Ethics Library, Routledge).
Leave a Reply