Judge Eldergill stated that P had mentioned wanting to be able to go to a restaurant (and there was also some mention of P being able to go to a bank). He referred to Paragraph X (of the Position Statement) which stated that the Home was concerned about P going out alone because he was at risk of absconding. However, the judge raised a point about the seemingly low likely risk of this happening, given that at another paragraph, it stated that P uses a Zimmer frame and so clearly has mobility issues.
Four potential care homes in the county to which Mrs H wishes to move “very clearly came back and said they could not meet her needs” (Counsel for Mrs H). “Actually”, he added, “she’s an extremely likeable, cheerful, happy, chirpy lady”. Moreover, “her wish to return to Ireland hasn’t waned in any shape or form”.
By Jamal L. Din, 27th July 2022 For some time now I’ve wanted to observe a hearing in the Court of Protection to gain experience of how the court hearing is run, and understand how the interests of the protected parties (and their families) are supported. I am a Deputy for Property and Finance forContinue reading “A deputy’s first experience of observing a Court of Protection hearing”
By Astral Heaven, 21st July 2022 I am a Local Authority Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) Lead and a practising Best Interests Assessor (BIA). Part of my role as BIA when I’m undertaking DoLS assessments is to talk with the person I am assessing, and with their family and friends,Continue reading “Family members as parties to proceedings: Pros and cons”
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.
Emma Heron and Olwen Cockell, 21st May 2021 Editorial Introduction (Celia Kitzinger) Two relative novices to the Court of Protection had their first experience of a hearing before Mr Justice Hayden on 20thMay 2021. They record their impressions here. I also observed this hearing (COP 1275114): a s.21A challenge on behalf of a man in his 40s withContinue reading “First Impressions of Hayden J in the Court of Protection”
Gerald “strongly believed he could manage at home with care visits, but preferred to stay in the current ‘so-so’ home if around-the-clock care was needed. If a care home was truly necessary, Gerald asked only that one capable of accommodating his cat could be found….”