Spotlight
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
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Will government vouchers prove a game-changer for family mediation?
Analysis of data to evaluate the government’s £500 family mediation voucher scheme is in full swing. It’s not yet complete but, as the initiative nears an end, the signs appear...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
Recently, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making misogyny a...
Guidance on allocation and gatekeeping for public children proceedings to remain in place
On 5 June 2020, the President of the Family Division made two amendments to his Guidance on Allocation and Gatekeeping for Care, Supervision and other Proceedings under Part IV of the Children...
Key challenges and the role of the family advisor in facilitating a successful succession plan
Kelly Noel-Smith, Private Client Partner, Forsters LLPRosie Schumm, Family Partner, Forsters LLPAnna Ferster, Family Associate, Forsters LLPHow best to pass on wealth to the next generation is a...
View all articles
Authors

Court of Appeal says that people without mental capacity must be involved in legal proceedings about their liberty

Sep 29, 2018, 22:10 PM
family law, Cheshire West, Re X (Court of Protection Practice) [2015] EWCA Civ 599, DOL, deprivation of liberty, mental capacity
People who are unable to make decisions for themselves because they lack mental capacity should always be directly involved in court hearings about their personal liberty, the Court of Appeal said today.
Slug : court-of-appeal-says-that-people-without-mental-capacity-must-be-involved-in-legal-proceedings-about-their-liberty
Meta Title : Court of Appeal says that people without mental capacity must be involved in legal proceedings about their liberty
Meta Keywords : family law, Cheshire West, Re X (Court of Protection Practice) [2015] EWCA Civ 599, DOL, deprivation of liberty, mental capacity
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 16, 2015, 08:45 AM
Article ID : 109605
People who are unable to make decisions for themselves because they lack mental capacity should always be directly involved in court hearings about their personal liberty, the Court of Appeal said today.

The judgment Re X (Court of Protection Practice) [2015] EWCA Civ 599 affects people being cared for in hospital, care homes or supported living with conditions, such as Alzheimer's, autism or learning disabilities, which mean that they cannot consent to restrictions on their liberty.

The judgment means that streamlined procedures recently introduced in the Court of Protection should not prevent people who lack capacity from participating in or having legal representation at hearings which affect their liberty. This can include restraint, restrictions on their movements or on visitors, or enforced medical treatment. The procedures had been introduced in the Court of Protection to reduce pressure on that court, and will now need to be reconsidered.

Law Society president, Andrew Caplen, said:

'When someone is living with dementia or a learning disability, it is essential that the care and treatment which they receive is in their best interests. Sometimes that means providing treatment to which they are unable to consent. More and more families with elderly relatives are having to face that reality.

The Law Society lodged an appeal because the fundamental rights of patients to participate in legal proceedings about their liberty were at risk. We are grateful for being given permission to appeal.

We recognise the resourcing pressures on the Court of Protection, but anyone facing court proceedings which concern their liberty must be able to participate effectively in or be legally represented at those proceedings. We hope to work closely with the Court of Protection to resolve the issues brought to light by the judgment.'
Yogi Amin, Head of Public Law at Irwin Mitchell leading the case, said:

'This case revolves around the need to ensure that applications to authorise an individual’s deprivation of liberty are dealt with efficiently given the inevitable strain on resources, but that individuals’ rights are still safeguarded.

DoL applications all concern vulnerable and incapacitated people. There is a real need to ensure that applications to limit a person’s freedom are given the correct amount of judicial attention, and that individuals have access to the court in order to put forward their views, have access to legal representation, and to object to their deprivation of liberty if necessary.

Following this Court of Appeal judgment, it is clear that the individual at the heart of the each DoL application must always be made a part of the proceedings themselves. This may mean many local authorities will have to review their existing authorisations and ensure that the individual in question is properly represented at the next court review.'
Today's judgment follows the landmark Supreme Court case of P v Cheshire West & Chester Council; P & Q v Surrey County Council in 2014, which lowered the threshold for cases to go to the Court of Protection. This has increased the number of vulnerable people whose restrictions require authorisation by the Court of Protection.
Categories :
  • News
Tags :
brain_6
Authors
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from