By Daniel Clark, 13th November 2024 Headlines in 2016 described the Court of Protection as a “most sinister” and “most secret” court. It ‘left a 94-year-old without savings or dignity’. Looking back from the perspective of 2024 at the early years of the Court of Protection (since its modern incarnation in 2007), it is clearContinue reading “A review of transparency and open justice in the Court of Protection”
Tag Archives: Transparency
Respecting autonomy in treating Anorexia Nervosa
This case concerns a young woman with a diagnosis of anorexia nervosa. A Trust seeks court declarations about her treatment.
Cross-jurisdictional challenges and Schedule 3 in a case of anorexia: Health Service Executive of Ireland v SM [2024] EWCOP 60
By Sydney White, 11th November 2024 This case (COP 13398706) concerns a young woman (SM) with a diagnosis of anorexia nervosa and a history of depressive episodes. She’s “habitually resident” in Ireland but has for some time been receiving treatment at Ellern Mede, a specialist eating disorder provider in England. Hayden J has heard this case beforeContinue reading “Cross-jurisdictional challenges and Schedule 3 in a case of anorexia: Health Service Executive of Ireland v SM [2024] EWCOP 60”
How much court ‘oversight’ should there be in long-running COP cases?
By Claire Martin, 6th November 2024 UPDATE: An application to name the local authority (originally prevented by the terms of the Transparency Order) was successful. The local authority is Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead . This hearing (COP 11868452), before HHJ Tolson, on 23rd September 2024, at Reading County Court, was listed as a two-hour ‘fact-finding’Continue reading “How much court ‘oversight’ should there be in long-running COP cases? “
A protracted hospital stay: A next hearing in the ‘renal failure’ case
At the end of October 2024, a man in his forties with Down Syndrome and learning disabilities, was removed from his home and transferred to hospital against his own and his father’s wishes.
An urgent case: Renal failure and an application for forced ‘extraction and conveyance’ to hospital
By Claire Martin, 31st October 2024 P is a man in his 40s, with Down Syndrome and learning disabilities. Two years ago, in 2022, he was diagnosed with ‘significant renal problems’. They’ve been difficult to monitor because P’s father, with whom he lives, is said to believe that doctors intend to harm his son. TheContinue reading “An urgent case: Renal failure and an application for forced ‘extraction and conveyance’ to hospital”
Treatment for Anorexia Nervosa: A brief directions hearing (with a new postscript on transparency)
This case concerns CC, who has a diagnosis of anorexia nervosa. A Trust seeks court declarations about her treatment.
Moving forward in Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings): A social work perspective
The reality is that they are likely to experience ongoing and significant state intervention with potentially daily visits from carers, fortnightly visits from health and social care practitioners, medical and hospital appointments etc. While living at home with her mother has been what A has been asking for all along, and the court has determined that it is in her best interests to do so, it may not feel like the least intrusive option given the level of scrutiny and stress they will be exposed to
A is back home and taking her medication voluntarily: The final hearing in Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings)
By Claire Martin, 23rd October 2024 Editorial note: Another observer (Meg Niven Withers, a social worker) also watched this same hearing and has blogged separately here: Moving forward in Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings): A social work perspective The case (Re: A) has been in the Court of Protection since 2018 and we’ve been following itContinue reading “A is back home and taking her medication voluntarily: The final hearing in Re A (Covert Medication: Closed Proceedings)”
Can the court require certain information to be reported and specific words to be used as a condition of publication about proceedings?
‘The court gives permission asked for in paragraphs 1 & 2 on condition that […] the family members are referred to as “they/them” instead of [xxxxxxxx redacted – the words were conventional gendered pronouns]…. any publication should record that there was no formal application made by any party to convert the proceedings from private to public, save for there being a short discussion at the beginning of the hearing’
Promoting Open Justice in the Court of Protection 