header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 December 2013 / Charles Foster
Issue: 7588 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Taking an interest in best interests

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
web_foster

Charles Foster reports on a case that seeks to clarify best interests, in the best interests of clarity

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) has reached the Supreme Court for the first time. Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789, [1993] 1 All ER 821 has been revisited. As a result, Bland has been endorsed, as has the Code of Practice under the Act.

Bland could only ever be re-examined in circumstances of great tragedy. The tragedy here was that of David James and his family: see Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James [2013] UKSC 67, [2013] All ER (D) 339 (Oct). James had been treated successfully for colon cancer, but there were subsequent complications. He had a stroke, a cardiac arrest, recurring infections, septic shock and multiple organ failure. A tracheostomy was performed. At the time of the hearing before the judge of first instance (Mr Justice Peter Jackson), James had a type of mechanically supported breathing for 12 hours a day, and received

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll