Notes (For the whole article of which these notes are a part click here.)

[1] Gregson v Gilbert (1783) 99 ER 629.

[2] Act 3 & 4 William IV. C. 73. Cited in H Catterall, Judicial Cases Concerning American Slavery and the Negro, Shannon: Irish University Press, 1968 at 13.

[3] Cartwright's Case (1569) 2 Rushworth 468.

[4] Somerset v Stewart (1772) Lofft 1 cited in Jud at 15

[5] For example see Williams v Williams [1881] Ch D 659 or Doodeward v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406.

[6] Haynes's Case (1614) 12 Co. REP. 113

[7] R Atherton, "Claims on the deceased: The Corpse as Property", (2000) 7 Journal of Law and Medicine 361 at 366.

[8] R Magnusson, "The Recognition of Proprietary Rights in Human Tissue in Common Law Jurisdictions", (1992) 18 Melbourne University Law Review 601 at 603.

[9] Dr Handyside's Case; Exelby v Handyside (1749) 2 East PC 652

[10] P Matthews, "Whose Body? People As Property", (1983) Current Legal Problems 193 at 208.

[11] Above n 10 at 210.

[12] See for example Stephen's assertion that a corpse could not be stolen cited in P Matthews, "Whose Body? People As Property", (1983) Current Legal Problems 193 at 197.

[13] R v Cundick (1822) Dowl. & Ry N.P. 13

[14] Above n. 13 at 14.

[15] R v Sharpe (1856) Dears & Bell 159.

[16] Above n. 15 at 160.

[17] Smith v Tamworth City Council (unreported) No. 4196 of 1996, 14 May 1997.

[18] Smith v Tamworth City Council (unreported) No. 4196 of 1996, 14 May 1997.

[19] R v Stewart (1840) 12 Ad & E 773

[20] R Magnusson, "The Recognition of Proprietary Rights in Human Tissue in Common Law Jurisdictions", (1992) 18 Melbourne University Law Review 601 at 611.

[21] Williams v Williams [1881] Ch D 659.

[22] Brotherton v Cleveland 923 F 2d 477.

[23] Doodeward v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406.

[24] Above n. 23 at 411.

[25] Above n. 23 at 414.

[26] Above n. 23 at 414.

[27] Above n. 23 at 412.

[28] Above n. 23 at 412.

[29] Above n. 23 at 416.

[30] M Lynch, "Property in Human Gametic Material and the New Reproductive Technologies", (1999) 6 Journal of Law and Medicine 348 at 352.

[31] Doodeward v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406 at 422.

[32] Stephen's History of Criminal Law cited in P Matthews, "Whose Body? People As Property", (1983) Current Legal Problems 193 at 219.

[33] R v Kelly and Lindsay [1998] EWCA Crim 1578 (14th May, 1998).

[34] D Ranson, "Medical Issues", (1998) 6 Journal of Law and Medicine 16 at 16.

[35] R v Kelly and Lindsay [1998] EWCA Crim 1578 (14th May, 1998) at paragraph 39.

[36] Above n. 35 at paragraph 42.

[37] Above n. 35 at paragraph 42.

[38] L Griggs, "The ownership of Excised Body Parts Does an Individual Have the Right to Sell?" (1994) 1 Journal of Law and Medicine 223 at 226.

[39] The State v Truesdale (1972)13 NC App 622.

[40] J Potts, "Moore v Regents of the University of California", (1992) 86 Northwestern University Law Review 453 at 485.

[41] For example see R v Herbert (1961) 25 Journal of Criminal Law 163.

[42] R v Welsh [1974] RTR 478

[43] D Mortimer, "Property Rights in Body Parts: The relevance of Moore's Case in Australia", (1993) 19 Monash University Law Review 217 at 244

[44] R v Rothery [1976] RTR 550.

[45] D Mortimer, "Property Rights in Body Parts: The relevance of Moore's Case in Australia", (1993) 19 Monash University Law Review 217 at 245.

[46] E v Australian Red Cross Society (1991) 99 ALR 601.

[47] PQ v Australian Red Cross Society [1992] 1 VR 19.

[48] J Potts, "Moore v Regents of the University of California", (1992) 86 Northwestern University Law Review 453 at 455.

[49] J Potts, "Moore v Regents of the University of California", (1992) 86 Northwestern University Law Review 453 at 455.

[50] Above n. 49 at 455

[51] D Mortimer, "Property Rights in Body Parts: The relevance of Moore's Case in Australia", (1993) 19 Monash University Law Review 217 at 219.

[52] Above n. 48 at 174.

[53] Above n. 48 at 174.

[54] Pecar v National Australia Trustees Ltd (The Estate of Ivan Urlich Deceased) (unreported) (96002518) Number 2518 of 1996, 27 November 1996.

[55] Dobson v North Tyneside Health Authority (1996) 4 All ER 474.

[56] Roche v Douglas as Administrator of the Estate of Edward John Hamilton Rowan (Dec) (unreported) [2000] WASC 146 (7 June 2000).

[57] Above n. 56 at paragraph 3.

[58] Above n. 56 at paragraph 14.

[59] AW v CW [2002] NSWSC 301 (17 April 2002).

[60] AB v Attorney General of Victoria (unreported, Supreme court of Victoria No 6553 of 1998, 23 July 1998).

[61] M Lynch, "Property in Human Gametic Material and the New Reproductive Technologies", (1999) 6 Journal of Law and Medicine 348 at 352.

[62] Maw v Western Area Health Service (2000) 49 NSWLR 231.

[63] In the matter of Gray [2000] QSC 390

[64] In the matter of Gray [2000] QSC 390 at 7.

[65] R v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority; Ex parte Blood [1997] 2 All ER 687.

[66] Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd (1994) 179 CLR 520.

[67] Brodie v Singleton Shire Council [2001] HCA 29 (31 May 2001).

[68] Above n. 67 at paragraph 79.

[69] Above n. 67 at paragraph 227.

[70] Above n. 67 at paragraph 65.

[71] E Jaffe, "She's Got Bette Davis['s] Eyes: Assessing the Non-consensual Removal of Cadaver Organs Under the Takings and Due Process Clauses", (1990) 90 Columbia Law Review 528

[72] Mabo v Queensland (1992) 175 CLR 1

[73] Bentham cited in M Lynch, "Property in Human Gametic Material and the New Reproductive Technologies", (1999) 6 Journal of Law and Medicine 348 at 352 at 349.

[74] L Griggs, "The ownership of Excised Body Parts Does an Individual Have the Right to Sell?" (1994) 1 Journal of Law and Medicine 223 at 224.

[75] J Potts, "Moore v Regents of the University of California", (1992) 86 Northwestern University Law Review 453 at 481.

[76] Mabo v Queensland (1992) 175 CLR 1.

[77] Above n. 76 per Brennan J at paragraph 53.

[78] S 32 Human Tissue Act 1983.

[79] Andrus v Allard 444 US 51 (1979) cited in Columbia Law Review.

[80] R v Vines and Williamson (1993) 70 A Crim R 113.

[81] Bollen J in Anic and Styliano and Suleyman v R (1993) 68 A Crim R 313 at paragraph 6.

[82] Griffith CJ Doodeward v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406 at 412.

[83] Mabo v Queensland (1992) 175 CLR 1.

[84] Griffiths CJ in Doodeward v Spence (1908) 6 CLR 406 at 411.

[85] D Resnik, "DNA Patents and Human Dignity", (2001) 29 Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 152 at 152.

[86] M Neave, C Rossiter & M Stone, Property Law Cases and Materials, 6th ed, Sydney: Butterworths 1999 at 3.

[87] See discussions of these problems in G Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons", (1968) 162 Science 1243.

[88] G Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons", (1968) 162 Science 1243.

[89] Above n. 88 at 1245.

[90] Above n. 88 at 1246.

[91] J Yeomans, "Judge lashes 'crass' price tag on people", The Australian July 28-29 2001, page 3.

[92] Moore v Regents of University of California (1990) 51 Cal. 3d 120 at 160.