Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
Focusing on behaviour and attitudes of separating parents
I am sure that if this year's Family Law Awards were an in-person event as usual, rather than this year’s virtual occasion, much of the chatter among family law professionals would be...
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