header-logo header-logo

13 February 2023
Categories: Legal News , Court of Protection , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

LNB NEWS: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publishes guidance for Court of Protection closed hearings and closed material

The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has provided practice guidance for Court of Protection closed hearings and closed material. 

Lexis®Library update: This guidance has been formulated to establish clear procedure in which closed material and closed hearings fall to be considered in the Court of Protection, following the decision in Re A (Covert Medication, Closed Proceedings) [2022] EWCOP 44. The purpose of this guidance is to provide clarity as to the principles to be applied and considerations to be taken into account in the very limited circumstances under which such steps may be appropriate.

According to the guidance:

Closed hearings are hearings from which a party and (where the party is represented) the party’s representative is excluded by order of the court.  For the avoidance of doubt, this is different to a 'private hearing,' which is a hearing at which all the parties are present (or represented), but from which members of the public and the press are excluded.

Closed material is material which the court has determined should not be seen by the party (and/or their representative). 

The practice guidance applies to situations where an order may be made that a party is not to be told of the fact or outcome of a without notice application.

The guidance also outlines the considerations when ordering a closed hearing, procedural matters where an application for a closed hearing has been made and situations where a party is not to be told of the fact or outcomes of a without notice application. With regards to closing material, it considers the consequential steps during the currency of the proceedings.

Read the full guidance here.

Source: Guidance for the Court of Protection: 'Closed hearings' and 'closed material'

This content was first published by LNB News / Lexis®Library, a LexisNexis® company, on 10 February 2023 and is published with permission. Further information can be found at: www.lexisnexis.co.uk.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
back-to-top-scroll