Mr Justice Horner's ruling on the availability of abortion in Northern Ireland will intensify debate over this emotive issue and raises concerns over the courts rather than elected representatives determining policy.
Yesterday's landmark ruling in Belfast High court marks a significant development in terms of how abortion in certain specific circumstances is viewed from a legal standpoint.
The case was brought by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission which asked the court to declare that the current law, relating to access to termination of pregnancy services for women in cases of serious malformation of the foetus or pregnancy as a result of rape or incest, is incompatible with human rights law.
Submissions were made to the court by the Catholic Church, pro life groups and Attorney General John Larkin, who argued there was no public appetite for a change in the law.
A submission was also made on behalf of Sarah Ewart, whose distressing case highlighted the difficulties facing women who are told their unborn child has a fatal abnormality.
In such cases, the judge concluded that the mother's inability to access an abortion was a `gross interference with her personal autonomy.'
He also said in cases of fatal foetal abnormality the child cannot survive independently and `there is no life to protect.'
This ruling will cause dismay among those who are opposed to abortion in any circumstances but the one thing we can be sure of is that this is not the end of the legal process.
As Mr Justice Horner pointed out, this is an issue which has not been addressed by the Assembly and is unlikely to be tackled by the legislature in the foreseeable future.
No matter what side of the debate people are on, it cannot be regarded as satisfactory for these important matters to be handed over to the courts.
It should be our politicians making these decisions on behalf of those they represent. Women in traumatic situations and the medical professionals caring for them need to have certainty.
