header-logo header-logo

Mental Health

19 February 2010
Issue: 7405 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Re M (vulnerable adult) (testamentary capacity) [2009] EWHC 2525 (Fam), [2009] All ER (D) 314 (Oct)

The starting point in cases concerning persons lacking capacity brought under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was the “structured decision making process” prescribed by the Act, a process that required the decision maker to take a number of steps before reaching a decision, including encouraging the vulnerable person to participate in the decision, “considering” the vulnerable person’s past and present wishes; which was always a significant factor to which the court had to pay close regard, her beliefs and values, and “taking into account” the views of third parties as to what would be in the vulnerable person’s best interests.

The statute laid down no hierarchy as between the various factors that had to be borne in mind, beyond the overarching principle that what was determinative was the judicial evaluation of what was in the vulnerable person’s “best interests”.

The weight to be attached to the various factors would, inevitably, differ depending upon the individual circumstances of the particular case. Having

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll