FD25P00172 and FD25P00173 - [2025] EWHC 1325 (Fam)

In conclusion, I shall give permission for the single joint instruction of Dr Cotterill, consultant endocrinologist, to provide the court with the answers to the questions set out above. I will ask leading and junior counsel to draw an order accordingly.

Finally, and to repeat, this case is and always will be about only one thing. Namely, B’s best interests. This is not, as it has been described in some correspondence the court has seen, a “landmark” case. It is already difficult for a young person when their parents decide to engage lawyers and commence litigation as a means of challenging their choices. Those difficulties can only be enlarged if attempts are made to use such already emotionally charged family litigation as a collateral means of addressing matters of policy with respect to gender affirming treatment that are properly the province of the NHS, the medical profession, the regulators and Parliament. The court will not permit that to happen.