Amarain Limbozzi, Ignacio et al. v. INCUCAI

A. 1261. XLVII.
Download Judgment: Spanish
Country: Argentina
Region: Americas
Year: 2014
Court: Supreme Court of Justice [Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina]
Health Topics: Child and adolescent health, Health systems and financing
Human Rights: Right to health, Right to life
Tags: Health regulation, Health systems and financing, Right to Effective Remedy, Right to Health, Right to Life, Stem Cells

The plaintiffs filed a guarantee of protection of individual constitutional rights (amparo protection) against the INCUCAI [Instituto Nacional Central Único Coordinador de Ablación e Implante] that challenged the INCUCAI resolution that prohibits the autologous use of the hematopoietic stem cell originated in placental blood and umbilical cord obtained in the birth of their children.

The Federal First Instance Court of Bahía Blanca [Juzgado de Primera Instancia Federal n°1 de Bahía Blanca] dismissed the amparo protection and redirect is as precautionary measure. The plaintiff filed an appeal with the Federal Courts of Appeal of Bahía Blanca [Cámara Federal de Apelaciones de Bahía Blanca] that confirmed the previous judgement. The plaintiffs filed an extraordinary appeal with the Supreme Court of Justice that was denied and then presented a complain before the Supreme Court that was accepted.

The public defender intervened in the case before the Supreme Court arguing that he was not part of the case in the previous courts, the process was void because the rights of the children were violated and the right to fair trial and effective remedy were violated.

 

The Supreme Court of Justice found that the all the proceedings that took place in previous courts that did not have the intervention of the Public Defender should be considered void because the double representation stipulated in the law did not take case, violating the right to effective remedy, fair trial and the rights of the children. As the precautionary measure was favorable of the rights of the children, to avoid a nullification that would violate the rights of children, the proceeding was declared void from the moment where there was no intervention of the public defender in the precautionary measure.

The Supreme Court accepted the complaint, and declared the nullity of the proceedings that took place after the precautionary measure and send the case to the corresponding court to dictate a different judgement in accordance to the Supreme Court's decision.

View Summary as PDF