Counsel for the local authority said they would look to carry out the move on Thursday (two days later). The judge explored with everyone how this would work in practice. As always, Senior Judge Hilder’s questions showed exemplary attention to detail in planning ahead as well as displaying her grasp of the material in the bundle.
Tag Archives: Best Interests
Court approves sedative PRN medication
By Maria Maier, 17th June 2026 As an Independent Advocate for individuals who lack mental capacity, I have seen at first-hand the vital role the Court of Protection plays in safeguarding some of the most vulnerable members of society. Despite its importance, the Court’s work is often overlooked and underreported. By observing and reporting onContinue reading “Court approves sedative PRN medication”
Iatrogenic harm and the Court of Protection
Court proceedings can cause unintended harm to the person at the centre of the case (“P”) as well as to P’s family, and to P’s wider support network….
Anorexia, declaratory protection and the Mental Health Act: Ventilating a jurisdictional question following Townsend
Given the likelihood of an upcoming Supreme Court hearing, it may be that Townsend provides a very slender thread on which to base the Trust’s argument – or indeed, on which to delay determination of P’s best interests by first detouring down what might turn out to be a jurisdictional cul-de-sac over the next six weeks.
Fit for discharge and still in hospital five months later due to delay with eating and drinking plan – updated after 12th May 2026 hearing
There’ s a deceptively simple solution to enable P to leave hospital – the development of an eating and drinking plan – but a complex web of responsibilities for making that happen, involving multiple public bodies, multiple teams, and multiple people
Judge refuses to make Civil Restraint Order against P’s father
By Celia Kitzinger, 30th March 2026 A Court of Protection judge has refused an application from South Tyneside Council to make a Civil Restraint Order (CRO) against the father of a young autistic man living in supported accommodation. I observed the hearing (COP 14075351) before Mr Justice Poole sitting in person in the Royal CourtsContinue reading “Judge refuses to make Civil Restraint Order against P’s father”
Court of Appeal to decide whether open justice applies to the Court of Protection: Briefing for CA-2025-001953 Re Gardner (Deceased)
In this ‘advance briefing’, I will set out the relevant background and a short summary of the arguments of the appellant and the intervenors. I hope this will assist observers to follow the hearing – either in real-time (in person in the Royal Courts of Justice or via the live-stream) or subsequently via the recording likely to be available after the hearing on the court’s YouTube channel.
Permission to appeal refused: A procedural dead end
By Elissa Novak (with an introduction by Celia Kitzinger), 22nd February 2026 This is effectively the third tranche of litigation in the long-running case concerning Luba Macpherson and her daughter, “FP”. First came the welfare proceedings for FP which were concluded in 2023[1]. Then came committal proceedings which concluded in 2025 with Luba serving aContinue reading “Permission to appeal refused: A procedural dead end”
How to vary the duration of a Transparency Order from “until further order of the court” to “until the death of P”: My family’s Court of Protection story continued
By Amanda Hill, 12th February 2026 I am the daughter of a protected party in the Court of Protection. I can say that because at a hearing in March 2025, HHJ Murch approved my application to vary the Transparency Order covering my mum’s case, so that I could be identified as a family member ofContinue reading “How to vary the duration of a Transparency Order from “until further order of the court” to “until the death of P”: My family’s Court of Protection story continued”
“This cannot be allowed to carry on”: A non-compliance hearing with NHS Humber and North Yorkshire ICB
According to the OS, there had been “a disagreement between the parties” about whether or not the court ought to make that order in the first place (the ICB wanted instead to focus only on whether and how improvements could be made to JH’s current home) – so it rather looks as though the ICB has simply failed to comply with an order they don’t like.
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 