At an emergency hearing on 24th September 2021, His Honour Judge Tindal issued an injunction against Miss F preventing her from having any contact with Mr G (Case 13382192). At the hearing I attended on 21st October 2021, not only was the injunction made in September lifted, but the court encouraged Miss F to have as much contact with Mr G as possible.
Tag Archives: Not Secret Court
A COVID Vaccination hearing: Observations of an aspiring medical student
By Eloise Crang, 19th October 2021 I’m a medical applicant, currently sitting my last year of A-levels studying Maths, Chemistry, and Biology, so I was delighted at the opportunity to observe a real-life medical ethics case in play. Having mainly read about these sorts of scenarios in medical books, or when revising for the situationalContinue reading “A COVID Vaccination hearing: Observations of an aspiring medical student”
When another assessment is not needed: Best interests decision-making for a patient with a prolonged disorder of consciousness
s going to be, what would he have decided? He was not going to decide that on the basis of a SMART score.”
What happens when Lasting Power of Attorney goes wrong?
“There had been a major family falling out between the LPA and her siblings. They saw her as “controlling”, “aggressive” and “paranoid” and said she had imposed unnecessary restrictions on their right to see their mother.” The judge said, ““I appreciate there’s a family dynamic, and it’s tragic to see it play out”.
A court-authorised hip replacement
declaration ordering surgery was the right outcome. I saw a rigorous but caring and collegial environment in court, with a genuine commitment to involving P. Counsel for the parties adopted a clearly non-adversarial approach throughout. The focus for everyone was on making the right decision for P.
Suppressing transparency: A judge comments on a blog post in court
open justice. I had a physical reaction, my gut dropping like a stone, when HHJ Howells said what she did. Their status and power makes judges intimidating. Barristers are used to the judge addressing them – and they are part of proceedings and can reply. This is not the situation for observers. I was shocked by what happened and this episode has caused me not a small amount of anxiety. I’m a bit worried about writing this account of what happened and how I felt about it. It’s taken me a long time to feel able to do so.
Coercive and controlling behaviour and undue influence: What is the role of the local authority?
By Bridget Penhale, 13th September 2021 I recently attended most of a 3-day Court of Protection hearing (reported in a blog post by Prof. Celia Kitzinger) concerning alleged coercive and controlling behaviour and undue influence by a man (NC) in relation to an older woman (BU). BU had stated that she wished to marry (or formContinue reading “Coercive and controlling behaviour and undue influence: What is the role of the local authority?”
Best interests in a contested end-of-life case: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v AH & Ors [2021] EWCOP 51
What Claire and I witnessed in the Court of Protection was a determined, serious, and lengthy attempt on the part of the judge to determine what AH would want, in the absence of any direct record to help him. Mr Justice Hayden tried very hard to find out what her wishes would be, and to respect them – giving effect to her autonomy and self-determination.
Covering the Court of Protection – a journalist’s take
This is an account of why and how journalists’ reports of hearings are typically so different from the pieces written by bloggers for projects like the Open Justice Court of Protection Project.
A best interest decision about life-sustaining treatment for a person with profound neurological injury following COVID-19 infection
d is enormous and awful to read about” such that she “will never be able to live outside of residential care” and “things that have been dear to her, she will never be able to enjoy in the way she would have contemplated”. But he clearly stated that this “hypothetical factual matrix” (i.e. even if these facts are all true), “does not automatically indicate a clear best interests outcome”.
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 