No decision without representation

There was no legal representation for Mr M, nor was he in court himself.  The judge said, right away, as soon as this became apparent: “I’m highly unlikely to do anything of substance today, without him being represented”.

Court considers how to operate against patient’s will

By Daniel Cloake, 2nd August 2021 This report concerns a case (COP 12132507 In the Matter of “AB” ) before The Hon. Mr Justice Hayden sitting remotely on 20 July 2021. The subject matter of the hearing was presented like this in the Transparency Order: This application is listed for hearing at 10.30 am onContinue reading “Court considers how to operate against patient’s will”

On being ‘that person’: A disabled perspective on ‘ZA’

By Gill Loomes-Quinn, 29th April 2021 My OJCOP colleague, Celia Kitzinger, and our regular contributor, Claire Martin recently observed a challenging case before the Court of Protection concerning ‘ZA’ – a woman with Schizophrenia and diabetes. Proceedings followed an application by the NHS Trust from which ZA has been receiving treatment for severe infections andContinue reading “On being ‘that person’: A disabled perspective on ‘ZA’”

Delay in a Section 21A Challenge to the Capacity Requirement

One obviously concerning aspect of this case is that Mr B’s (possibly unlawful) deprivation of liberty has been going on for a long time. I’m not sure when he moved into the care home, or at what point he started objecting to living there, but proceedings challenging his detention began more than a year ago, in January 2020.

Endoscopic dilatation against P’s wishes?

By Ravina Bahra, 10 February 2021 This hearing (case number: COP 13711789) before Ms Justice Russell on 9 February 2021 concerned an application to authorise up to five treatment procedures – likely to involve some degree of restraint amounting to deprivation of liberty – that P does not want to undergo. This was a directionsContinue reading “Endoscopic dilatation against P’s wishes?”

Unwanted amputation and its likely aftermath

By Monica Young, 23 December 2020 Editorial note: You can listen to Nageena Khalique QC, counsel for P talking about this case in a YouTube video: click here. Her account of this case lasts for about four minutes starting at 18:50 minutes into the recording. The hearing that I attended on Thursday 17th December 2020 (Case: 13693467Continue reading “Unwanted amputation and its likely aftermath”

A Permissive Order For Amputation Contrary to P’s Wishes

“…Lieven J’s handling of an emergency application and the way in which best interests was decided in this case are going to greatly inform my future research into the way in which the best interests test is applied by professionals in both medical and legal settings…”