header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

COVID-19: Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
06 May 2020 / Laura Davidson
Issue: 7885 / Categories: Features , Covid-19 , Human rights , Mental health
printer mail-detail
Credit: Gettyimages/iStockphoto

Laura Davidson discusses an urgent Court of Protection hearing held over Skype which demonstrates the powerful & competing rights & interests of care home residents lawfully deprived of their liberty during the coronavirus pandemic
  • BP v Surrey County Council and RP [2020] EWCOP 17 considered the ramifications of the current coronavirus pandemic for care home residents lawfully deprived of their liberty under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, and assessed BP’s best interests in terms of residence where his rights under Article 8 were being severely curtailed.
  • A subsequent permission hearing is also discussed ([2020] EWCOP 22). NB copy updated: 06 May 2020

BP, a former bookmaker, is 83 years old, deaf, and suffers from Alzheimer’s disease. Safeguarding concerns had been raised due to an allegation that his disease had caused him to be aggressive towards his wife, RP. He had been moved to SH care home as a self-funder in June 2019 following hospital in-patient treatment, but had always objected to his new placement, wishing to return home.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Motor finance faces £11bn reckoning
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
NLJ this week: Gold on Awaab’s Law & digital divorce
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
NLJ this week: AI in the dock—courts need literacy, not fear
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Landlords lose their upward climb
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
NLJ this week: Privy Council undresses the ‘shareholder rule’
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll