header-logo header-logo

Protecting the vulnerable

06 January 2011 / Ed Mitchell
Issue: 7447 / Categories: Features , Community care
printer mail-detail

Ed Mitchell provides an update from the Court of Protection

Under Rule 157 of the Court of Protection Rules, the general rule in personal welfare proceedings is that there shall be no order as to costs. Rule 159 provides that the general rule may be departed from where “the circumstances so justify” and goes on to list factors that are to be taken into account in deciding if departure is justified. The factors include the conduct of the parties. Two recent decisions provide examples of when it may be permissible to depart from the general rule and make a costs order against a party.

In the Matter of RC (Deceased) (Case no 11639140) was a decision of Judge Lush, the senior judge of the Court of Protection. The ruling will be of particular interest to local authorities involved in disputes with the relatives of vulnerable adults about how they should be cared for. If such disputes are resolved by way of Court of Protection proceedings, significant resources can be expended and so the authority

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