openjusticecourtofprotection

If you were a Supreme Court judge, how would you decide Cheshire West Revisited?

Observers form opinions about what they see, opinions informed by their own unique expertise and knowledge base (professional and personal).

The Mostyn Objection

The writer and political salonnière Jeanne Marie “Manon” Roland was guillotined in Paris on 8th November 1793. Legend has it that her last words on the scaffold were, “O Liberté, que de crimes on commet en ton nom!”—“Oh Liberty, what crimes are committed in your name!”

Feeding under sedation for anorexia nervosa: The outcome for LV [2025] EWCOP 9

By Sydney White, 18th November 2025 The protected party at the centre of this case, LV, is a 20-year-old woman diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, autism spectrum disorder, severe depression, and anxiety. At the time of the first Court of Protection hearing, in early 2025, she was an inpatient on a ward in a specialist eatingContinue reading “Feeding under sedation for anorexia nervosa: The outcome for LV [2025] EWCOP 9”

Hoarding and best interests challenges for the Court of Protection

By Claire Martin, 16th November 2025 The protected party at the centre of this case (P) is a man who has significant hoarding difficulties. The Local Authority wants him to leave his home – either by agreement or by force – to enable them to clear the property and assess the amount of work thatContinue reading “Hoarding and best interests challenges for the Court of Protection”

Abstract argument: The Attorney General for Northern Ireland’s Reference to the Supreme Court

Many of the hypothetical arguments and postulated facts raised at the hearing concerned not the issue of consent on which the Attorney General sought guidance, but the wider issue of whether Cheshire West was correctly decided viz. the “acid test”. That question was raised late in the day by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care who does not have standing to refer cases directly to the Supreme Court himself…

When open justice undermines public confidence: Scrutinising the Supreme Court

Justice is not a cloistered virtue; she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even though outspoken, comments of ordinary men

Pre-Hearing Draft Orders: Procedure, Not Pressure

Filing draft orders before hearings is not about ambushing the other side or influencing the judge. It is a procedural requirement.

P’s Advance Decision to Refuse Treatment is not valid, not applicable, and not a reflection of her past or present wishes

It seems to me that the judge was entitled to make the decision that P’s ADRT was invalid. That causes me concern because of what it means not just for P but for everyone else with ADRTs. Do our ADRTs adequately reflect what we want? Do we really understand what they might mean for how we are treated – or not treated – in future?

Non-compliance: What happens when public bodies don’t obey court orders?

It concerns “non-compliance issues” in a case called JS v South Tyneside Council – and I guessed (correctly) that the non-compliance related to the behaviour of South Tyneside Council rather than to JS, the protected party in the case.

“Liberty” in the Supreme Court

“What about somebody who is so demented they’re effectively catatonic. Just spend the day in front of a television set. Is that person- In what sense does that person have any liberty which she can be deprived of?” (Lord Reed)