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”

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

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.

Reflections of a freelance mental capacity consultant on the Supreme Court case about deprivation of liberty

I know it’s not a popular view, but I consider the limitations on my daughter’s liberty arise from the injury. She cannot always bring forward and initiate ideas; she can’t go out alone – not because we or the State want to impede her experience of liberty but because the combination of visual impairment, mobility impairment and speed of processing information make it unsafe for her to do so.

A committal, a closed hearing, and forced removal of P

It was fascinating to to be able to ‘eavesdrop’ on the practical and legal dilemmas created by this situation as it unfolded in real time. … to appreciate how decisions emerge in response to changing events on the ground, and how competing arguments are advanced (often fervently) by people committed to P’s best interests but with different perspectives on how P’s best interests should be served

Serving a prison sentence for contempt of court: Luba Macpherson

The Court of Appeal was (again) displaying to others who might be tempted to flout court orders that it would not hesitate to exact punishment.

An urgent caesarean application in a disturbing case

She went to Somalia to be with her grandmother, and she returned to the UK in July 2025.  When she arrived at hospital the following month, having had a fall, clinicians realised she was eight months pregnant.

Attorneys disagree about a house purchase for their mother: Case management for a final hearing

Court of Protection judges are very experienced in dealing with fraught situations and family dispute. The stakes are high when family members disagree about the care or finances of a relative who lacks capacity to make their own decisions, and there are likely to be different perspectives on who is being most loving, or reasonable or responsible, who started what, or who is to blame for the current situation.

“Let me talk about my partner’s death”– Court of Protection told

By Daniel Cloake, 23rd September 2025 Editorial note: Judgment in this case has now been published: Re Carl Gardner, Deceased (Duration of Transparency Order). This blog is reprinted, with permission (and a few minor changes) from Daniel’s own website: mouseinthecourt.co.uk. Daniel observed this hearing (COP 20006397) in person in Court 33 at the Royal CourtsContinue reading ““Let me talk about my partner’s death”– Court of Protection told”