header-logo header-logo

24 June 2010
Issue: 7423 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Court of Protection issues first report

An “admirably honest” first report by the Court of Protection highlights how the court has struggled under a high volume workload.

The court, which was set up in October 2007 under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, makes decisions for people who lack capacity. As the public guardian, it must make decisions behind closed doors about its wards’ best interests. This has led to it being branded “secretive” in some quarters of the media.
Its first report shows it has suffered several teething problems.

Introducing the report, Denzil Lush, senior judge, said: “The court has had to endure more than its fair share of setbacks, which were caused in the main by a failure to anticipate...the volume of work that would inundate the court during the initial transitional period, and the overall burden it would place on the judges and staff.”

Typical criticism levelled against the court, Lush said, is that its procedures are too “bureaucratic and time-consuming”. The court required six judges to cope with its workload but has had to make do with four.

However, Lush said that the court’s procedures are currently under review and should become more efficient in time.

David Hewitt, partner, healthcare, Weightmans LLP, says: “It is an admirably honest document that makes no attempt to ignore or even minimise the criticisms that have been made of the new court.

“That said, some sensible improvements are being made and it is likely that their effect will soon be felt. Overall, the benefits the court has brought will soon substantially outweigh the disbenefits.”
 
 

Issue: 7423 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll