Mental health

North Yorkshire County Council and another v MAG and another [2016] EWCOP 5, [2016] All ER (D) 148 (Jan)

The Court of Protection allowed an appeal by a local authority against a decision by a trial judge refusing to authorise a patient’s deprivation of liberty in his home pursuant to s 16 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The court found that the judge had, in her zeal to have the patient accommodated more suitably, failed to apply the best interests test by which all substantive decisions of the court were governed. Had she applied that test she could have granted the authorisation.

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

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap

When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations

What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection?

NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR

Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?

NLJ this week: Where would we be without limitation?

In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?

NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases

When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ

Error message

Mental health

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean