header-logo header-logo

17 May 2013
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mental health

PC (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) and another v A Local Authority [2013] EWCA Civ 478, [2013] All ER (D) 71 (May)
 

The determination of capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was decision specific. Some decisions, for example agreeing to marry or consenting to divorce, were status or act specific. Some other decisions, for example whether an individual should have contact with a particular individual, might be person specific. However, all decisions, whatever their nature, fell to be evaluated within the straightforward and clear structure of the Act, which, by ss 1–3 required the court to have regard to “a matter” requiring “a decision”. There was neither need nor justification for the plain words of the Act to be embellished. Further, the Act itself made a distinction between some decisions, set out in s 27, which as a category were exempt from the court’s welfare jurisdiction once the relevant incapacity was established, and other decisions, set out in s 17 of the Act, which were intended to relate to a “specified person” or

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll