National Health Service

The defendant NHS England’s individual funding request panel had either misinterpreted the phrase ‘clinical effectiveness’, or misunderstood or materially mischaracterised the evidence on that topic in having decided not to provide funding.

Accordingly, the Administrative Court allowed the claimant’s application for judicial review and quashed the decision as, if ‘clinical effectiveness’ was properly interpreted, there was no room for a rational conclusion that Kuvan was not clinically effective or that the evidence of its clinical effectiveness was insufficient.