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
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

In the matter of D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

Oct 1, 2019, 13:04 PM
Medical treatment – Deprivation of liberty – Consent – Parental responsibility
The Supreme Court held that parental consent could not substitute for the subjective requirement under article 5 ECHR for valid consent to the deprivation.
Slug :
Meta Title : In the matter of D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42
Meta Keywords : Medical treatment – Deprivation of liberty – Consent – Parental responsibility
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 30, 2019, 23:00 PM
Article ID :

(Supreme Court, Hale, Carnwath, Black, Lloyd-Jones and Arden LJJ, 26 September 2019)

Medical treatment – Deprivation of liberty – Consent – Parental responsibility.

The Supreme Court held that parental consent could not substitute for the subjective requirement under article 5 ECHR for valid consent to the deprivation.

 


 

For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and European courts case, subscribe to Family Law Reports.

Subscribers can log in here.

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of the Family Law Reports. Please quote: 100482.

 


 

THE COURT ORDERED that no one shall publish or reveal the name or address of the Appellant who is the subject of these proceedings or publish or reveal any information which would be likely to lead to the identification of the Appellant or of any member of his family in connection with these proceedings.

[2019] UKSC 42
On appeal from: [2017] EWCA Civ 1695

JUDGMENT

In the matter of D (A Child)

before

Lady Hale, President
Lord Carnwath
Lady Black
Lord Lloyd-Jones
Lady Arden

JUDGMENT GIVEN ON

26 September 2019

Heard on 3 and 4 October 2018

 

Judgment:  In the matter of D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

 

Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Medical Treatment
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from