The guidance is intended to cover serious medical treatment cases as well as health and welfare cases and property and affairs cases. It is intended to supplement not replace guidance issued in 2016 by Mr Justice Charles, which is reproduced below Hayden J’s guidance.
It applies to remote meetings as well as face-to-face ones, with Hayden J noting technology can be deployed ‘in a more creative and flexible way than had hitherto been realised’.
Hayden J’s guidance advises there be discussion towards identifying a clear understanding of the scope and ambit of the visit but notes ‘it is in the nature of such visits that the parameters may become unsettled or expanded by events and exchanges’.
He therefore emphasises the judge will not be conducting a formal evidence-gathering exercise, and the visit may highlight aspects of evidence already heard and result in the judge making further enquiries of the parties. Hayden J also emphasises the judge must be accompanied by the Official Solicitor or the party’s representative, that it will be rare for a member of the party’s family to be present (and should be avoided), that a note must be taken of the visit and quickly made available to the judge for their approval, and where a judge considers the visit may have had or might be perceived to have had an influence on the ‘best interests’ decision, this must be communicated to the parties.
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
