header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
06 May 2020 / Laura Davidson
Issue: 7885 / Categories: Features , Covid-19 , Human rights , Mental health
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll