Terminally ill baby Charlie Gard's parents 'upset' by European court decision

The European Court of Human Rights has rejected a plea to intervene in the case.

Terminally ill baby Charlie Gard's parents 'upset' by European court decision

Chris Gard and Connie Yates, the parents of eight-month-old Charlie Gard, arrive at The Royal Courts of Justice in London where a judge is due to announce his decision over their baby boy's life support treatment. Stefan Rousseau/PA Wire/PA Images

The European Court of Human Rights has rejected a plea from the parents of a terminally ill British baby to intervene in the case.

Charlie Gard has a severe mitochondrial condition and in January suffered what doctors describe as irreversible brain damage.

Specialists at Great Ormond Street Hospital think the 10-month-old has no chance of survival and want to end his life support treatment.

But his parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, from Bedfont, west London want him to undergo a therapy trial in the US.

On June 19th, judges at the ECHR ordered doctors to continue treatment while they considered the complex case.

But they have now announced the application by Charlie's parents is "inadmissible".

Speaking to media in the UK, Charlie Gard's tearful mother said "it was too upsetting to talk at the moment".

The European Court announced that it had by a majority "endorsed in substance" the approach by the UK courts.

It added that the court "also considered that it was appropriate to lift the interim measure" which had required doctors to continue providing life support treatment to Charlie.

It continued that the British courts had concluded "on the basis of extensive, high-quality expert evidence, that it was most likely Charlie was being exposed to continued pain, suffering and distress and that undergoing experimental treatment with no prospects of success would offer no benefit, and continue to cause him significant harm".

A High Court judge ruled against Charlie's family in April, a decision backed by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

Additional reporting from IRN