Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce
and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email
editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Will extending jurisdiction to missing people overstretch the Court of Protection?
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
This article originally appeared in
New Law Journal, the leading weekly legal magazine.
Find the latest UK law news and legal advice with information and analysis from the legal world. Keep up to date with essential developments in legal trends, case-law, legislation, practice and procedure to ensure you can continue to do your job effectively.
Created by the Mental Capacity Act 2005, the Court of Protection makes decisions on behalf of people who do not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. It makes finely balanced best interests assessments and oversees the appointment, functioning and discharge of deputies and attorneys.
Since its inception, its workload has skyrocketed. This influx of cases was accelerated by the Supreme Court case of
P v Cheshire West and Chester Council; P and Q (by the Official Solicitor) v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19. This case widened the interpretation of ‘deprivation of liberty’ in care home settings and meant that local authorities were under a duty to apply to the Court of Protection for authorisation in far more cases than had previously been envisaged.
Read the full article here.
