e of poor practice, and active resistance from some quarters, the court could also make clear that continued provision of medical treatment when it is not in someone’s best interests is an assault, and that clinicians will not be able to rely on the defence in s.5 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 – meaning that there is a risk to them and to their organisations of claims for damages.
Author Archives: openjusticecourtofprotection
“What is he saying to us?” The ‘voice’ of a hunger-striking man in a best interests decision about his medical treatment
By Gill Loomes-Quinn, 14th July 2021 During the afternoon of Tuesday 25th May 2021, I found myself back in the (virtual) Court of Protection for what was my first observation for several months. I was expecting to observe the latest hearing in Case Number COP 1275114 Re RD (Emma Heron and Olwen Cockell had written about an earlierContinue reading ““What is he saying to us?” The ‘voice’ of a hunger-striking man in a best interests decision about his medical treatment”
Dental Clearance with Post Intensive Care Syndrome: A Compassionate Decision by Hayden J
This hearing arose because a hospital trust has applied for welfare orders under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to permit them (i) to perform a full dental clearance on M in hospital under general anaesthetic, and (ii) to use a combination of chemical and physical restraint in order to manage M’s transfer to hospital.
Capacity to Engage in Sexual Relations: A forthcoming Supreme Court hearing
By Charlotte Roscoe and Celia Kitzinger, 9th July 2021 Editorial Note: This blog post concerns a case in the Supreme Court. The Open Justice Court of Protection Project normally covers only cases in the Court of Protection. We have made an exception in this case (as we have before, for cases in the Court ofContinue reading “Capacity to Engage in Sexual Relations: A forthcoming Supreme Court hearing”
Predatory marriage and coercive control: A hearing before Roberts J
By Celia Kitzinger, 12th July 2021[1] Update: This judgment has now been published BU, Re [2021] EWCOP 54 (24 September 2021) This case before Mrs Justice Roberts, (COP 13503831 heard on 6th – 8th July 2021) concerns coercive control and a planned predatory marriage (or civil partnership). Evidence from an expert psychologist appointed by the court, ProfessorContinue reading “Predatory marriage and coercive control: A hearing before Roberts J”
On care, coercion and childbirth in the Court of Protection
By Ruth Fletcher, 5th July 2021 The decision in ‘An Expectant Mother’ is unsettling on many levels, not least because it takes a harsh legal approach when a care-full one is needed. Instead of paying even more attention to the experience of the agoraphobic pregnant woman at the heart of this case, somehow the judgment has endedContinue reading “On care, coercion and childbirth in the Court of Protection”
Delays in finding an Acquired Brain Injury Placement: “A very significant degree of muddle”
By Gaby Parker, 29th June 2021 On 23rd June 2021 I observed a hearing (via MS Teams) before Mr Justice Hayden in the Court of Protection: COP 1354439T Re. PH. The case was about finding a suitable placement for P who remains in hospital although he is fit for discharge and has been for a long time. TheContinue reading “Delays in finding an Acquired Brain Injury Placement: “A very significant degree of muddle””
Keeping Mum in her own home: Deprivation of Liberty and Powers of Attorney for health and welfare
By Celia Kitzinger, 28th June 2021 Update: I’m informed that the next hearing for this case (previously listed for 2nd July 2021) has now been vacated, and is re-listed for 4th August 2021 at 3pm. We will post information about how to observe on our home page in due course. Most of the hearings weContinue reading “Keeping Mum in her own home: Deprivation of Liberty and Powers of Attorney for health and welfare”
“You can’t ask the High Court to turn a blind eye to illegal detention”
“You have to do better than that. You can’t ask the High Court to turn a blind eye to illegal detention. If this was an immigration case, I would be letting him out now. You can’t unlawfully detain people in the UK. You’ve got four days to sort this out. If the situation is that he should just go home – then just do it. I’m not going to order you to do it because I haven’t got the evidence.” (Mrs Justice Lieven)
Urgency, delayed decision-making and ethics in the Court of Protection
reatment for patients who are unable to decide for themselves. In England and Wales, they haven’t, or only extremely rarely, been called as expert witnesses. Yet ethics is obviously central to the work of the Court of Protection. And if this hearing is anything to go by, if judges or barristers were willing to call on them, it seems that there could be a place for an ethicist in the courtroom.
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 