Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Perspectives on civil partnerships and marriages in England and Wales: aspects, attitudes and assessments
IntroductionThis article considers the developments since the turn of the century in the provision of new options for same sex and opposite sex couples to formalise their unions with full legal...
Family Law journal - take the survey and you could win £50 worth of vouchers
Do you subscribe to Family Law journal?Our aim is to provide all subscribers of Family Law with compelling, insightful and helpful content that you enjoy reading and find useful in your...
Commencement date of 6 April 2022 announced for the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020
The Ministry of Justice has announced that the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020), which received Royal Assent on 25 June 2020, will now have a commencement date of 6 April 2022....
HMCTS blog highlights the use of video hearing due to COVID-19
HM Courts & Tribunals Service has published a blog detailing the impacts of coronavirus (COVID-19) on hearings. Pre-pandemic, HMCTS states that the use of video technology for live participation...
View all articles
Authors

WELFARE:PH v A Local Authority and Z Limited and R [2011] EWHC 1704 (Fam), [2012] COPLR 128

Sep 29, 2018, 21:32 PM
Slug : 2011ewhc1704fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 25, 2012, 02:40 AM
Article ID : 98939

(Court of Protection, Baker J, 30 June 2011)

The 49-year-old man suffered from Huntindon's disease and had been cared for by his wife in the community. When his condition deteriorated he was placed in a residential care home and was told it was a temporary placement. In fact it was a permanent arrangement. The man issued proceedings to challenge the standard authorisation put in place by the local authority under Sch A1 to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

An independent psychiatrist reported that the man had capacity to decide where he should live but his treating psychiatrist, social worker and two GPs who had assessed the man determined that he lacked capacity in that regard.

In finding that the man lacked capacity to determine where he should live the judge found that the man lacked the ability to understand retain and weigh salient information about such decisions.

Categories :
  • Court of Protection
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from