Capacity for contact – Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection

Uncertainty about capacity for contact – and the inappropriateness of using the inherent jurisdiction

Mrs Justice Lieven remarked that “a vast amount of lawyers and legal expenses” were being used on “a relatively small amount of issues, with very fine distinctions” and that further assessment “does not feel to me, like a proportionate way forward, in a cash-strapped system” where in the case of P “there are already 8 lawyers and 3 detailed assessments”, pertinently adding “What benefit is there to P in all of this?”

“Grave concerns”: Funding arrangements, capacity for sex, and a TZ-style care plan

By Celia Kitzinger, 13th July 2022 The protected party at the centre of this case (COP 13627568 before DJ Glassbrook sitting in Northampton on 8th July 2022[i]) was described as “ a 19-year-old lady with diagnoses including Mild Learning Disability. Mixed Disorders of Conduct and Emotion, and Reactive Attachment Disorder of childhood”. Introducing the hearing for the benefitContinue reading ““Grave concerns”: Funding arrangements, capacity for sex, and a TZ-style care plan”