‘Man uses money for teenage son’s funeral to pay for lawyers to argue at Court of Protection doctors should continue giving him chemotherapy.’
Daily Telegraph, 26th May 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
In re MN (An Adult) (Court of Protection: Jurisdiction): [2015] EWCA Civ 411; [2015] WLR (D) 208
‘The function of the Court of Protection was to take, on behalf of adults who lacked capacity, the decisions which, if they had capacity, they would take themselves. The Court of Protection was thus confined to choosing between available options, including those which there was good reason to believe would be forthcoming in the foreseeable future and, in the final analysis, could not compel a public authority to agree to a care plan which the authority was unwilling to implement.’
WLR Daily, 7th May 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The president of the Family Division has bemoaned what he called ‘systemic failures’ in Court of Protection procedures causing cases to take years to reach full hearing.’
Full story
Law Society’s Gazette, 8th May 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘William Latimer-Sayer highlights some points arising out of the record-breaking award in Robshaw v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 923 (QB).’
Cloisters, 10th April 2015
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘A healthcare NHS Trust v P & Q [2015] EWCOP (13 March 2015). The Court of Protection has clarified the position on revealing the identity of an incapacitated adult where reporting restrictions apply.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 19th March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘This paper provides an overview of the procedure which has been put in place to implement the streamlined process by which the Court of Protection may authorise deprivations of liberty following the Supreme Court decision in P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19.’
Full story (PDF)
Thirty Nine Essex Street, February 2015
Source: www.39essex.com
‘Court of Protection rules that specialists can lawfully stop providing chemotherapy to terminally-ill teenager.’
Daily Telegraph, 14th February 2015
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘The fact that a party deliberately acted in defiance of a best interests declaration made by the Court of Protection could not, without more, trigger contempt proceedings since a declaration was ultimately no more than a formal, explicit statement or announcement and there could not be “defiance” or “enforcement” of such a declaration.’
WLR Daily, 29th January 2015
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The high cost of welfare cases in the Court of Protection is “a matter of serious concern” and – alongside the lengthy duration of such proceedings – requires urgent investigation, researchers at Cardiff University have said.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd February 2015
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘With a significant backlog of care home cases in the Court of Protection, P’s case runs the risk of becoming something of a precedent on the question of damages for unlawful detention. However, as far as calculation of damages goes, it is light on analysis of principle. This post seeks to explore whether the considerable case law that has developed on damages for false imprisonment in other situations may help illuminate what this type of case is worth.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 29th January 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Speech by The Hon. Mr Justice Mostyn: The Craft of Judging and Legal Reasoning at the Bristol University School of Law on 8 December 2014.’
Judiciary of England and Wales, 12th December 2014
Source: www.judiciary.gov.uk
‘A judge has sharply criticised the delay and expense of proceedings in the Court of Protection, describing the relevant procedural rules as “inadequate”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 2nd December 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v KW and others: [2014] EWCOP 45; [2014] WLR (D) 493
‘Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was not engaged where a person, often elderly, who was both physically and mentally disabled to a severe extent, was being looked after in her own home and where the arrangements had been made and paid for by a local authority rather than by the person’s own, or family, funds.’
WLR Daily, 18th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Further guidance on the approach to a “streamlined” process to deal with all deprivation of liberty (“DoL”) cases in a timely but just and fair way which was compliant with article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 16th October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The issues that arose before the Court of Protection in this case encapsulate the difficulties involved in applying legal tools to the organic swamp of human pathology. Everything that one may envisage, for example, in planning a “living will” (or, more precisely, an Advance Decision under the Mental Capacity Act), may have no application at the critical time because the human body – or rather the way it falls apart – does not fit in to neat legal categories. In such a situation it is often the right to autonomy that is most at risk, since what you plan for your own medical and physiological future may not square with what the authorities you decide you were capable of planning. Cobb J’s sensitive and humane judgement in this sad case is a very encouraging sign that courts are beginning to resist the tyrannous claims of Article 2 and the obligation to preserve life at all costs.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘A judge has ruled a pregnant woman who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia will undergo a Caesarean section.’
The Independent, 22nd October 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘District Judge Anselm Eldergill says Court of Protection should normally be open to the Press, in moves first mooted almost a year ago by another senior judge.’
Daily Telegraph, 17th October 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A Local Authority and M (By his litigation friend via the Official Solicitor) v E and A (Respondents) [2014] EWCOP 33 (11 August 2014). And now the Court of Protection has published a ruling by Baker J that a a supporter of the discredited doctor Andrew Wakefield embarked on an odyssey of intrusive remedies and responses to her son’s disorder, fabricating claims of damage from immunisation, earning her membership of what science journalist Brian Deer calls the class of “Wakefield mothers.” ‘
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th October 2014
Source: http://ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024