header-logo header-logo

15 March 2017
Issue: 7738 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Deprivation of liberty law “unfit for purpose”

The law on deprivation of liberty is “unfit for purpose”, leaving thousands of people with dementia or learning disabilities detained in hospitals and care homes without the appropriate checks, the Law Commission has said.

The 2014 Cheshire West case widened the definition of who was subject to “deprivation of liberty safeguards”, putting local authorities under increased pressure and adversely affecting vulnerable people.

In a report and draft Bill published this week, “Mental capacity and deprivation of liberty”, the Law Commission proposes a new scheme, the “Liberty Protection Safeguards”. It would cut unnecessary dupliucation by taking into account previous assessments, enabling authorisations to cover more than one setting and allowing renewals for those with long-term conditions, extend responsibility for giving authorisations from councils to the NHS, and simplify the “best interests” assessment.

Law Commissioner Nicolas Paines QC said: “The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were designed at a time when considerably fewer people were considered deprived of their liberty. Now they are failing those they were set up to protect. The current system needs to be scrapped and replaced right away.”

Andriy Buniak, solicitor at Mander Hadley, who specialises in Court of Protection work, urged people to have a solicitor prepare a Health and Welfare Lasting Power of Attorney while they still had capacity.

Issue: 7738 / 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
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’
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll